GuzziMoto

Fair enough. I made a V11 rear subframe and seat fit on a Daytona. It was more different then I expected, but it wasn't that hard to make fit by my standards and likely much harder than what you are talking about. But I suspect some would have given up as it became apparent how different two related Moto Guzzi's were. As mentioned, things like trans length and how the V11 engine is offset to one side some 10mm or so would likely prevent it from being a direct bolt in option. I would think the 6 speed gearbox from the V11 would be shorter than the 5 speed box for the Sport, but that is a guess. Phil would likely know more specifics on the differences there. So, some of that may depend on which direction you are going. Going from longer gearbox to shorter gearbox seems like less of an issue than going the other way. That would mean more room for the crossover, not less I would think. An exhaust from a V11 should be an easier fit on a Sport then a Sport exhaust on a V11 I would think.

Plenty of opinions here, no doubt all of them valid in their own way. My two cents; Most anything can be made to fit, depending on how much effort you are willing to put into it. But if you expect it to bolt right up I doubt that is going to happen. Some bending, maybe cutting and welding, would likely be required. But as a guy who has made exhausts from a completely different motorcycle from a completely different manufacturer fit when something for my motorcycle simply didn't exist, it can be done. It is just a matter of how much effort are you willing to put into it.

To be fair, I think it is cool, especially some of the touches like a bevel cam drive (although the baby versions don't have that it seems). And they are pretty. For me, I would want some with more then a 230cc or 250cc engine for where I live. A 500cc single would be great. A 400cc single is okay, but I already have that.

Future? That looks retro to me. They are cool, but I don't think a 230cc bike would sell well here. A 400cc - 500cc single would be a better option. The wife and I own two smaller bikes, a pair of Husqvarna 401's. They are great fun to ride. But I am glad they are as big as the are engine wise, I don't think I would enjoy them nearly as much if they were 230cc. In fact, I wish they used the larger KTM single. Even KTM realized they needed more power, as this year that line of bikes gets a longer stroke and more torque. The new ones also get a better dash, ours have a dash that is nearly useless, and they get a larger gas tank it seems. An extra gallon of gas is huge when it only holds 2.4 gallons to begin with. It sucks having to fill up every 100 miles or so.

Could be, Marc Marquez could win the title. Or not. He might be a favorite with some people, but he is clearly not a sure thing. I am not even sure the champion will be riding a Ducati. Bez on the Ape was really quick, and he isn't even the fastest guy riding an Aprilia this year. It will be interesting to see what Martin can get out of it. And KTM is right there. However it goes, it appears that Ducati has lost most of the advantage they had last year, Ducati literally has pretty much what they had last year while the other manufacturers have made progress. Even Yamaha and Honda are right there. Honda still needs to sort some power and traction issues, they need more power but don't have enough traction for the power they have now. But on tracks with good traction they are right there even without the extra power they need. So things are certainly even closer then they were last year. I don't know about your statement that the others have not caught up. Test times indicate they have. But testing doesn't pay points. We will see soon enough who has what. It should be fun to watch.

My somewhat educated opinion is if I was buying a Norge I would rather buy the 8V version. But that is in part driven by already owning a 2V Griso. The 8V engine is not exactly the pinnacle of design engineering, but it does make more power then the older 2V engine and in a more interesting way from what I understand. It does tend to get worse fuel mileage than the 2V engine, it seems to lack the combustion efficiency of the 2V engine, so if fuel mileage is more important to you then power that could be a consideration. But for me I can't imagine wanting to ride more than 160 miles before stopping anyway. I get that some do, but I need an occasional stop, might as well be for fuel.

As to MotoGP news, very interesting developments with Ducati. It seems they will not homologate their new 2025 engine and instead they will homologate the 2024 engine for the 2025 and 2026 seasons. Also, they seem to prefer the 2024 chassis, although that is not something they will be locked into for the next two years. Once they get the new chassis to where it is faster than the 2024 they would be free to switch as long as the 2024 engine fits in it. p6x, you beat me to it....

Perhaps. As I recall, years ago on the wifes V11 when one of her relays was not working right she would get the daytime running light in the headlight lit (which, if you looked at it without really looking you might think the low beam was lit but dim), along with her rear running light. And if she turned on her high beam I believe it would light. But her low beam would not and her brake light would not. It struck me because I was following her for a while being very impressed that she wasn't hitting the brakes at all. Then we realized that some of her lights were not working, including her low beam and her brake light. It is possible that hers is wired differently to yours. I do not think all V11's share the same wiring. My main suggestion is not exactly what is the cause of the OP's problem but rather look further as they may not realize the extent of what is not working. Beyond that, it may be a matter of tracing the wiring back from the low beam towards the battery looking for where you go from not having voltage to having voltage. The two headlights share a ground, but they differ on the path to them.

It could be a variety of things. I would go over the bikes lights thoroughly, as you may find that other lights are also not working, for example check that not only does your tail light work but also that your brake light works, and that can mean the issue is in a different location. Everything from the headlight switch, to the ignition switch, to the relays that control power to all the various circuits, including power to the headlight (that is why the headlight goes out when cranking the engine with the starter). You can check to see if there is power at various points in the wiring to the low beam. I am pretty sure, but not looking at a schematic, that power for the high beam and power for the low beam come from different sources. So it is possible for the high beam to work and not the low beam. But again, I am only going off memory, and I am getting old.

Even how the luggage is loaded, affecting the weight distribution, can cause or solve wobbles. I have seen HD touring bikes being ridden better then guys on sportbikes. Seeing a guy on a bagger hustle it around a BattleTrax course is a sight to behold. A big Harley or similar bike does have less capability then the average sportbike, but most motorcycles being ridden on the street aren't being ridden at a level that is anywhere near the actual limits of the bike. So it is possible that a guy on a Harley may be going faster then a guy on a sportbike. I owned a cruiser for a year or so, not the average cruiser, but by my standards it was a cruiser. I found that it handled really well, the weight was more than I would want but it carried it pretty low. So it hid its weight. It would corner fine, but the scary thing was how quickly I would run out of cornering clearance and start dragging things. I was always worried I would simply not have enough cornering clearance to make a corner at the speed I went into the corner at. In the end, I was happy to see it go, and I rarely sell motorcycles.

Credit to Stefan Pierer, unlike most CEO's today he lives and breathes his company. Clearly he messed up, over-extending the companies resources. But unlike many CEO's, where it is just a numbers job, he actually cares about KTM. He has ridden them. I am pretty sure one way or another KTM will be on the grid when the season starts. Edited because I mis-spelled his name. My bad.

Perhaps, but most applications I work with that allow you to calibrate a speedo for different tire sizes use diameter or radius of the tire and not circumference. Perhaps others want the rolling circumference, but not ones I work with. My Jeep, for example, uses diameter. To get my 37" BFG KO2s to read the right speed and miles I had to enter a diameter of 35.25 as I recall. I have worked with bicycle speedo's that used a rolling diameter based input but I have not used rolling diameter for any automobile application I have worked with.

Personally, I like the OP's idea. But, as mentioned, I suspect it would be easier to use V11 Sport and Lemans parts then older models. They should all be similar, but you may find that they are only similar and not identical. But with some creative engineering you should be able to adapt them to suit. I think as long as someone has the time and or money to do it, go for it.

Generally the measurement is taken from the edge of the tread. Even still, you will get a different measurement on a mounted and installed tire if you measure side to side edge of the tread vs vertically from the ground to the top edge of the tread. That would be because the tire deforms at the contact patch, how much depends on air pressure in the tire. For general tire size measurements people tend to either measure a tire off the vehicle or measure an installed tire but measure side to side so the contact patch deformation doesn't enter into it. But when you are measuring for speedometer calibration you actually want to include that contact patch deformation, typically. So, there are times when measuring vertically from the ground to the top edge of the tire is desired. Being about 0.8" smaller then the published size is not bad. That is probably closer then the KO2 would have been. The KO2 tended to be around an inch or so smaller than the published size. And thanks for measuring.

So, a 285/70-17 KO3 is supposed to be 32.8" in diameter. But the same size KO2 was also supposed to 32.8" in diameter, and invariably it would be measurably smaller then that. As mentioned, tires tend to run smaller than their published size, and an actual inch smaller than actual size would be fairly normal. But the KO2 ran smaller then other tires compared to its published size. That is partially why I went to a 37" KO2 originally, the 35" KO2 tended to run just over 33" in diameter actual size, while the 37 is just over 35". I would be curious what the KO3 actually measures as installed on your truck. It doesn't have to be super-precise measuring, within a quarter inch or so should be accurate enough to get an idea of how they run.