GuzziMoto

In the end widgets like those are always a compromise. The problem is that they can only adjust the whole map in one direction or the other. Typically parts of the stock map are too lean while other parts are too rich. There is no one adjustment widget that will fix the whole map. Depending one where you ride, how you ride, and what bothers you, you may find that overall one of those widgets makes you think things are much better. It also might make you think things are much worse. the reality is likely somewhere in the middle. but due to the way they work they are at best a band-aid. Either the GuzziDiag software (too much trouble for me) or an adjustable modifier like a PowerCommander can actually allow you to take away fuel where you have too much and add it where you have to little. I look at widgets like the one in question as a overly simple answer to an overly complex question.

I also would start with the brass temp sensor holder. Anything that was done to the bike just before the problem surfaced should be especially suspect. Also, while the brass holder is more robust it likely has different characteristics and may give a different reading or influence the reading in a negative manor. Some Guzzi's use that sensor holder stock, but they may be set up to use the reading the the sensor/brass holder combo gives. Using the same combo with a map not designed for that combo may yield inferior results. You also may have a failing TPS or temp sensor itself. Best advice I have is be methodical in troubleshooting this and not just reactive.

I have a set of gears for the wifes V11, butI have not installed them yet. The set I got is a steel set as I recall (they are still in the box) and I think I got them through this site from a member.

The rating 5w/40 (or 10w/40, or whatever) means that at cold temps it has the viscosity of a 5 weight (or 10 weight if it is the 10w/40) oil. At warm temps, 100 degrees C, it has the viscosity of a 40 weight oil. This is measuring the viscosity, or thickness, of the oil. It is not measuring the slipperyness of the oil, nor is is measuring anything to do with the oil breaking down. To add to that, when you see a multi-grade oil like 10w/40 it is basically a 10 weight oil with viscosity modifiers that react under heat to thicken the oil. So, a 10w/40 oil is a 10 weight oil with viscosity modifiers to make it act like a 40 weight oil at 100 degrees C, and a 20w/50 is a thicker 20 weight base oil with visosity modifiers that make it act like a 50 weight oil at 100 degrees C. I don't know anything about Penrite Extra Ten technology.

Way back in the old days, when synthetic oils were fairly new, they used to say that. Synthetic oils have come a long way and there is no reason to do that anymore, other than the cost of the oil. As far as I know they come from Guzzi with synthetic oil in them from the factory. I would not put non-synthetic oil in there. Oil is very important to plain bearing motors.

Buying a generic house brand filter would be as much about price as anything else I would think. In today's day and age it is simple enough to buy them via the internet and they will show up at your house a few days later. There are more than a few quality filter brands out there that make filters for our Guzzi's. Any one of them should be easy enough to get with just a little planning.

I don't buy my oil filters based on price. I buy them as insurance to keep my motorcycles running and as such an extra dollar or two for a better quality filter is money well spent. There are a few ways a lower quality filter could cause damage to your prized machine, filter material failure, relief valve failure, gasket failure, etc. If you want to know how well a filter is made cut it apart. I have cut a few apart and after doing so I use either Wix or NAPA Gold filters. An oil filter is such a stupid thing to save a couple dollars on.

Yea, but that one is an air cooled twin, probably smaller.

That looked pretty nice when you started but looks really nice now.

Then I would ask Mike Rich what he recommends. He knows his parts and is one of the top Guzzi Builders in the USA. He certainly has done this more than I have.

Pretty difficult trick for one person. Once it's been done after an oil change and refill, one might mark a new level on the dipstick with (yellow) paint. Like I said, I'll fill it and in no time it's right down to the middle of the stick. I suppose a person could continually top it up. Really not that hard to do, as they say "Work smarter, not harder". If you are worried about dropping it park the bike next to a wall so that to fall one way would be towards you and to the other way the wall would stop it before it got anywhere. If you really want to be careful set the bike up in a stand, perhaps with tie downs, so it can't fall. Or just get a friend to help you. Some people are even swift enough to be able to sit on the bike holding it up right and reach down to the oil dip stick and check it. The one thing I don't like about leaning it on the stand and checking is that, while there is always only one "vertical", there can be many different angles that the bike can lean when sitting on the side stand. It depends on the level of the floor it is sitting on. Vertical is always vertical. It is always right.

That would be correct, if the new parts are substantially lighter than the ones they replace the balance of the rotating mass will be changed. That is almost always a change for the worse. To get the benefit of lighter rods and pistons you need to re-balance the crank. Besides, if you are doing that (who made these lighter parts?) you should probably be lightening the crank anyway. Most of the pistons I have seen are not lighter than stock. Carillo rods are often more about being stronger then lighter. Changing the rotating mass of the crank assembly is not an easy/simple thing to do. I would probably be working with an engine builder at that stage of things. Balancing the crank assembly requires removal from the motor. At least on a Guzzi you can do that without messing with the trans.

Standard practice is weigh the parts you took off and match the new parts weight by adding or removing metal if required. This is a little trick as you need to weigh both ends of the rods separately as well as total weight. Usually the new parts will be close enough and not require any metal added or removed. But it pays to check.

Pretty sure the oil pickup is part of the bottom of the sump, so any change there to the depth of the sump would not move the pickup off the bottom. And since the oil dip stick does not move when you install the plate it will simply require SLIGHTLY more oil to hit the full mark. Also, when installing the plate it is a great time to confirm the marks on the oil dip stick and make sure they are where you want them as to filling the sump. Besides, the plate is pretty thin and does not make much of a change to sump capacity. The main thing it does it keep what is in the sump IN THE SUMP (not sloshing around the bottom of the crank cases).

That is correct. Only the earliest Sports/ pre-Rosso Mandello. And yes, one can jack up his suspension settings enough to eliminate all forgiving margins. This can be followed by the sound of bouncing off the air dam of a BMW sedan. Experience is often the simple accumulation of bad judgement. Forwarned is fore armed as they say. You're almost making me happy they didn't lash out on ohlins for the tenni. There is nothing better about the Marzocchi / Sachs suspension over the Ohlins other than price. The Ohlins suspension is substantially better and had my wife had the choice she/I would have happily paid the relatively small premium for an Ohlins equipped bike. That said, there is no substitute for properly set up suspension. It does not matter how high quality the suspension components are, if they are not set up correctly they will not work well. Cheap suspension that is well set up can work better than expensive suspension that is not well set up. The lesson here is put in the effort/money to get your suspension set up WHATEVER it is. Basics like setting sag are often overlooked.

Baldini is correct, you can't increase rake by either raising the rear or lowering the front without reducing trail. To gain back the trail you would have to fit triple clamps with less offset, or otherwise increase the distance between the steering stem and a line drawn between the centers of the two fork tubes. Less offset equals more trail. Feel free to play with you geometry, raising the rear and/or dropping the front. But don't go too crazy with it, make small changes and feel the difference. And keep in mind that the increase in rake comes at a cost of reduced trail, which can rear its head at the worst time. The wifes V11 runs the front and rear ride heights at or near stock. We found that without jacking with the geometry trying to speed up the steering we were able to get ride of the steering damper (with the required trail it is stable and does not seem to need one) which resulted in a larger increase in steering response then you can get jacking with the geometry. Without the steering damper it steers light and fast. Not everyone actually wants their Guzzi to steer like that, and I suspect the steering damper and the reduced steering rake in the later frames were both in response to the perceived wants of the typical Guzzi rider. That seems to make sense because the first V11's (with red frames) were often accused of being twitchy. We have no idea what they were talking about. Keep in mind, hers is a red frame version which had about a degree steeper rake to begin with as I recall.

Looks like it would be worth the trip.....

The only change I made was to increase the preload by 11 full rotations, because it was (perhaps mistakenly) set at minimum preload. This raised the front and it is more stable (which I called "predictable" earlier, but I think "stable" is a more descriptive word.) I didn't touch the back, and I'm not sure if the previous owner did. I am just in my suspension-tuning infancy here, but I did notice that Camn's front free sag (no rider) was almost identical to my original setting (41 for me and 40 for him). The target range, according to the Ohlins fork manual, is 25-30. I had some high-speed wobbles when mine measured 41, but after adjusting it 11 full rotations (presumably to 30), the wobbles went away (I did not change anything else, not even the damper or tire pressure). Next step for me: try to get all front and rear sag measurements as close to the middle of the factory-spec ranges as possible - and then tinker from there if I still feel the need. If there's ever a trade-off, I prefer stability over quick steering. Sounds good. Setting sag correctly is often over looked and is really the first thing to do when setting up suspension. It will also tell you if your springs are too stiff, too soft, or just right. Perhaps, at least for me, some of the confusion comes from talk of raising or lowering the forks. Sometimes it is not clear if you mean raising the whole front end or sliding the forks up through the triple clamps which results in lowering the front of the motorcycle (which sounds like what Camn is talking about.

Some of the logic being thrown about here flies in the face of physics and motorcycle geometry. I am glad the OP found a better ride by adjusting his suspension. I am not clear on how he did it but it sounds like he raised the rear of the bike and lowered the front. That is not an uncommon practice, but it is usually done to make a motorcycle steer faster, not make it more stable. Doing so steepens the rake and reduces the trail, both of which contribute to quicker steering and less effort to steer. Neither is conducive to more stability. Doing this will also put SLIGHTLY more weight on the front wheel, but hardly enough to make the motorcycle more stable as a result. Try measuring with a set of scales to see how little it changes. While I like the idea of steeper rake I do not like giving up the trail that goes with the raise the back drop the front approach, trail is really important for stability. To each their own. All I can say here is the wife's red frame V11 (steeper rake from factory) does not have things like that done to it, it steers very well, does not have a steering damper, and does not wobble at any speed. If yours wobbles something is likely wrong.

I don't know what the "right amount" is for your forks. Somewhere in the 100mm range is commonly used, but it depends on the amount of travel the forks have and how much of that air space above the fork oil level is taken up by things other then air. It is not the same number for all forks. When I change the fork oil I usually measure the air gap before I start or measure the amount of oil I remove and add the same amount back in. That is assuming the forks work as I want them to already. If I am changing things I usually start with a smaller air gap and I keep removing oil until the forks lose that harshness that comes from too much oil. I find it easier to come from that direction then trying to keep adding oil until it seems right as the changes from removing too much oil are more distinct. You can certainly try 100mm, or you can go with, say, 90mm and keep removing a small (measured) amount each time until you like the way the forks feel. My target is to have the air gap getting compressed to where it becomes a noticeable air spring just as the forks are nearing bottoming. That allows the springs and dampening to do their thing for most of the forks travel and the air spring effect only comes into play at the end to help soften any possible bottoming. Everybody has their own preferences for how their forks/suspension work.

Yes, I agree. It is really about the volume of air above the forks. The right amount adds a small bit of botttoming resistance. Too little air volume leads to limited travel and harsh ride, past that it can lead to blown seals. To much air volume above the oil leads to softer forks and more of a chance of bottoming, but as long as there is enough oil to satisfy the needs of the dampening components it will still work. I am pretty sure he was referring to pinch the bottom of the forks together which results in the forks binding and not sliding up and down smoothly. Normally when you tighten an axle nut on the front wheel the other side of the axle is floating in the other leg of the forks. It does not pull the one fork leg towards the other.

I had a front tire go flat on my 440 dirt bike. It was only after I had picked myself and the bike up that I realized why I fell. It was instant loss of air from the tube. I have had flat tires with tubeless tires, there is usually some warning although when the tire comes apart there is no warning tubeless or tube. There are plenty of SuperMoto guys out there who have converted their tube style rims to tubeless. As long as the bead area of the rim supports a tubeless bead seal you can make the conversion work. It also allows you to plug the tire in an emergency without the extra work required to repair a tube. That alone makes me a fan as I do tend to ride in the middle of nowhere.

I would agree it seems a bit odd, but as I read it if you tighten the FOUR clamping screws before setting the axle nut torque it would not pinch the fork at all as the torque would be between the nut and the two pinch bolts (clamping screws) that are next to the axle nut. I don't have the version of forks you have, the wife's is an early red frame model. But my standard practice is to tighten the axle nut, which is normally floating on the other end so it does not pinch the forks, and then tighten the pinch bolts. I typically do not consult the manual for things I already know how to do.

I use Amsoil as well. I also hate riding in the rain but around here it does happen. As I mentioned, if you want to see how much oil it separates out of the air just temporarily replace the return back to the sump with a clear piece of hose that is capped off at the bottom. I know mine pumps a fair bit out and that is with Amsoil.

I suspect that if you've run all this time with the Sachs staying in one piece, it's not going to split any time soon. When I looked at the broken eye on the end of mine, it appeared that it had fractured at an angle and made me wonder if the alignment on the swing arm end bolt might be out, just a tad, but enough to stress it to failure point... Sachs shock bodies are alloy, right? If I'm right, you'll either get the problem with the Sachs or you won't. Happy Christmas all, by the way. First post in months, been away working but I got time at home today... at last! Not sure I follow your logic. If you are talking about my broken Sachs shock, I had/have no way of knowing how long it had been broken before being found. Might it have lasted a long time before completely failing had we not replaced the shock? Sure, it might have. But if/when it failed the consequences could have been serious or even fatal. So replacing it once the failure was found was a no brainer. If you want to compare pictures of Sachs failures let me know and I will see about getting some pics. Why it failed I am not sure. From memory it cracked near the base of the shock eye, it looked like it was pulled apart in extension, so maybe a length issue. From what I have heard from others once the shock is replaced there are no more problems. Nothing else needs to be changed.