GuzziMoto

Also, based on what was said here and in the Norton thread, I feel I should add that any proper cafe racer is built, not bought. You could by a V7 Sport and make a sweet cafe racer out of it. I personally don't think it is supposed to be a cafe racer from the factory, but it does seem to be a decent platform to build a cafe racer, as long as you aren't expecting an overly powerful cafe racer. Remove as much as you can off it, add a solo seat and a small flyscreen, some clip-ons, and higher footpegs. If you have the money, add better rear shocks. Done.

Yeah, the Norton is cool, but it is in a different league than the V7 Guzzi. And while I like the Norton a lot, I don't think they will sell that many of them as there probably is not that big a market for a retro bike that expensive. I could be wrong, but I would bet a donut that Guzzi sells more V7 Sports then Norton sells those. And if you are in the market for a V7, the V7 Sport doesn't seem to have much wrong with it. I wonder if some people want it to be something other then what it is. There is "Sport" in the name, but it is not a sportbike or even a cafe racer. I picture the use of "Sport" here more like the way Tommy Lee Jones's character would call Will Smith's character "Sport" in the Men in Black movies.

The "Sport" badge can be used in two different ways. Sometimes it is used for a faster, more performance oriented version of something. But other times it is used as a budget friendly package, designed to look more exciting but not actually be faster. This "Sport" looks to be a combination of the two. Some things like the forks and brakes appear to be an upgrade. But then, perhaps to offset the cost of the forks and brakes, they cut corners on other items and give you just a single gauge (It looks like it squeezes a speedo and tach into that single gauge, that is fine by me). On the bright side, I would assume that things like the seat with cowl and pegs / bars from other models could be interchanged with this one if desired. But only you can decide if it belongs in your garage. It does not belong in mine, but honestly Moto Guzzi does not currently sell a motorcycle that belongs in mine. The V100 is close, but I would want either a naked version of it or an MGS version of it. I know, two extremes on either side of the current V100, but the V100 needs either less or more to be one I would want. As is it is right in that middle ground that just doesn't do it for me. As for small blocks, we have one and that is enough. And ours is way cooler to me.

I remember all the people predicting that the sprint races will be crash fests.... But in the end that did not happen.

Oh, in 2005 Rossi was on the podium every race but one. There were 17 races that year. One DNF when he crashed out, every other race was a podium. Marc Marquez has likely had equally dominant years, but as I don't like him I am not going to dig up Marc's numbers. While Martin was consistent, it was in no way a domination. He won by ten points over another rider who won more but crashed out more. The turtle vs the hare.

It is hard to compare, as when Rossi raced there were never anywhere near this many races. Forty races is more then twice the number of races they had when Rossi raced. So it makes comparing hard. In 2020 Joan Mir won by being the most consistent guy. There were 14 races and he was on the podium seven times. So, no where near the percentage of podium finishes Martin had this year. But it was enough that he was able to win the title with only one race win. Back in 2001 there were 16 races, and Rossi won the title with 13 podium finishes, including 11 race wins. I am not great at math, but I believe as a percentage goes what Rossi had was as high or higher percentage of podiums in 2001 then Martin did this year. But then Rossi finished 2001 with 325 points to Biaggi in second places 219 points. So Rossi was clearly more dominant over those 16 races. It was not just podiums for Rossi, he had 11 race wins. Only two of his podiums were not wins.

Fair enough, but clearly the people running MotoGP don't agree with you. They want to expand and grow the sport. And so far it is working. These past two season have been very exciting.

As it is Sprint races are only worth at most just under half the points a full race is worth. You can win two sprint races and still not get as many points as you get for winning one GP. Bagnaia failed to finish in three full races, Portimao, Aragon, and Misano and five sprint races, Jerez, LeMans, Catalunya, Silverstone, and Sepang. Martin failed to finish in two full races, Jerez and Sachsenring, and two sprint races, Mugello and Mandalika. So, It is hard to say how many points each crash cost each rider, because a rider might not have won a race had he not crashed (I believe both riders crashed out of the lead at least once, Bagnaia did it right at the end of a race with a win surely in his grasp). But Bagnaia left a potential 75 points on the table by DNFing out of three GPs, plus 60 potential points by DNFing out of five sprint races. He clearly left more points on the table with his GP race DNFs, but the reality is he left too many points on the table by crashing too many times. Sure, he won more races, but that has never been what decides a championship (ask Joan Mir). It has always been about earning points over the season. And the reality is Martin crashed out fewer times, and took more second places then Bagnaia. Martin finished 2nd some sixteen times, where as Bagnaia finished 2nd two times. Sure, winning is the name of the game, but second pays almost as many points and if you can finish on the podium almost every time you have a good chance of winning the title. I believe Martin had only eight non-podium finishes, out of the forty races, including his DNFs. Bagnaia had thirteen non-podium finishes, again counting his DNFs. I am not a massive fan of the sprint races, but they do add a new element to the show. It is not a completely different form of racing, just a different length of race that puts less emphasis on conserving tires. And it has been on some weekends the more entertaining race. There are plenty of racing series that have different length races, that is actually really common. It can require different strategies to win different length races, but it is still racing the same bikes (or cars) around the same courses. In the end, there are a given number of races and each racer is trying to score as many points over the span of those races to win the championship. This year the racer that did that best was Jorge Martin.

Pretty sure we've been there, Shamrock Texas, but not with our bikes. We were there with our Jeep and RV trailer. There was a cool vinyl record shop across the way called Spinning Jenny's, sadly they are gone.

The last race worked out about how I expected. Martin was smart, and only did what he needed to do, taking what was there. Had Bagnaia not crashed as often as he did things may have been more dramatic. But as I recall Bagnaia crashed some eight times, while Martin only crashed four times. Interestingly, two of Bagnaia's crashes involved the two Marquez brothers..... I am happy to see Martin win the title and take it to Aprilia. I also look forward to Aprilia improving next year now that they finally have a top level rider. I realize that improvement is not a sure deal, but at least they have to opportunity for improvement with a rider like Martin. There certainly can be no more excuses for the bike being slow. While I like Aleix Espargaro as a character, he was never a top level racer in MotoGP. He was always just a little less then the true top level guys. And Mav was never a serious contender, he is a guy that will be fast every now and then, the rest of the time he struggles. But Martin is a top level guy, one who knows what it takes to win day in and day out. Hopefully Aprilia will be able to get that last tenth of performance they are currently lacking in the bike. It seems they need a little more stability under braking and better traction in corner exit. I am not a big fan of the bagger racing. I don't hate it, but it isn't really appealing to me, either. It does seem like a class that would not be popular anywhere but in the US. I can't see it going over well outside of the US.

Personally, I like your custom seat. I have always been impressed with the stock V11 Sport seat, it is surprisingly comfy for a stock seat. That was a selling point over the Triumph Speed Triple it was compared to. But that seat does look like it would be even better. And it does so without looking like a oversized monstrosity. Also, while that seat would not be a great seat for a racebike, or even a sportbike, it looks like a great seat for a sport touring bike in my opinion. Stylish enough but comfy. I think it is nice.

If you look at the picture posted up above earlier in this thread the fast idle cable and it mechanical linkage can be seen just to the left of where it says "Throttle Linkage". Not where the arrow is point, but just to the left of those words. To see it you want to be looking up from below on the right side. You can see the cable, and the cable is connected to the plate that when it is pulled on by the cable it makes contact with the throttle and slightly opens it. The throttle cables attaches to the left side throttlebody, the fast idle cable attaches to the underside of the right side throttlebody. It is a purely mechanical set up, you pull the fast idle lever, the cable connected to it pulls on a plate that as it is rotated by the cable it slightly opens the throttle butterfly. Since both throttle butterflies are connected by a linkage, opening one opens both. If the cable has lost its adjustment, if it has too much slack in it, the limited amount of travel that the fast idle lever has might not be enough to make the plate push the throttle open that slight amount that is required. You can see in that picture that there is a bolt that tightens down on the cable, you need enough slack so it does not open the throttle when you turn the handlebars from side to side but you don't want too much slack in the cable or it won't open the throttle when you pull the fast idle lever. Also, there is a known issue where a number of V11s, if not all of them, came from the factory with what appeared to be the fast idle spring and the seat release springs swapped. The springs have different stiffness's, and if they are swapped it can be, as I recall, hard to open the seat latch. But I might have that backwards. It has been a long time.

Fuses simply carry electricity from one connection to another. If the fuse can't do that, it is bad. There is no magic there, no mystery. Fuses can "blow", where the sacrificial link that carries said electricity overheats and melts. That is usually obvious to see, assuming the fuse is translucent. That sacrificial link can also break, which can be really hard to see. The fuse can also fail at its job because the method it uses to connect to the electrical harness in the fuse block don't work. This can mean the spades on the fuse simply don't make good contact with the connections in the fuse block, or even that there is enough corrosion or some other surface coating in the connection to prevent it from making the required connection. Even paint or, oddly enough, electrical grease, can cause that. As people here have mentioned, in the end what counts is does the fuse get electricity from one side of the fuse block to the other. If it doesn't, the fuse is failing to do its job, whatever the reason for that failure is. I have long since stopped using a visual inspection to check fuses. Either a meter set to check continuity or a test light to show that the voltage from the supply side gets to the fused side will tell you all you need to know.

If you polish the cast parts to get a smoother surface, and then anodize them, there would be no additional maintenance involved vs any other anodized part. When you anodize an aluminum part it does not hide or cover the surface. Any defects or textures in the surface will actually be highlighted by anodizing. It is very much like painting in that respect. If you want a good finish with a painted or anodized part you need to start with a great surface. Prep of the surface is 90% of getting a good result. That applies to painting the parts, powder coating the parts, and anodizing the parts. If you want to anodize cast aluminum parts but you want a smooth shiny finish you have to start with a smooth shiny finish. That typically means having the aluminum part polished before you anodize it. With painting and powder coating you can use surface coatings like high build primers to help you smooth out the surface of the part. Then, once the surface is properly smooth you can paint or powder coat over it. But you can't anodize over primers. It must be done to the bare aluminum. So the bare aluminum must have the desire surface finish before you anodize it. If it has a rough finish, like from being sand blasted or even just a rough cast finish, the anodizing will accentuate that rough finish, not cover it up. Chrome can also be used as a base for other finishes. While I do not like standard chrome, I do like "Black Chrome" It gives you a really shiny black finish. There are other clear colors you can apply over chrome as well. But you do you.

If you really want to anodize them, you can polish them first. That will give the anodizing a good base. There are also coatings you can apply over a polished or chromed surface that are similar to anodizing (yes you could chrome them, but as with anodizing you would want to polish them first). They come as both paint and powdercoat. They work well when applied over a smooth shiny surface. So to be effective you need to polish the cast aluminum parts first. Chroming them seems unnecessary.