GuzziMoto

Just did. Sorry, I tend to not check for those messages. Feel free to poke me when you send one. Or maybe I should send you my email address. I will get that sent soon. Unless you are going to be in the DC/Balt area anytime soon.

You could re-route/re-arrange the return hose set up. Some versions of the spine frame have a single return hose on the left. With a little creativity you could probably route it down the spine on the left and behind/under the gearbox, then bring it back forward to the fitting at the sump. I have not scoped any of that out but from memory I am sure you could come up with a less intrusive routing. The question is would any of that be worth it? I don't know, but I definitely not do away with either the breather or the return.

The spine is used as an oil/air separator. While you could remove it it would likely only increase the amount of oil you are losing out your breather. The hose should be run up underneath the spine and hardly noticeable. The returns that drain the oil that separates out back into the cases are much more noticeable. But again, they are serving a useful purpose.

There have been a few people, myself included, that have had issues with worn valve guides. The stock guides are made of hardened cheese and there is no valve guide seal so if the guide wears it allows a small amount of oil past. I don't think it is worth worrying about in most cases. If you are worried, do the basic checks like a compression test and/or leakdown test. I would not pull the heads unless those tests showed a cause for deeper concern. How many miles total are on it. I had to have the valves done on the wifes V11 because the guides were worn. It had somewhere north of 30,000 miles on it and the motor still ran fine, I could have put it off but I was doing some other things to it and figured I'd fix the valve guides while we were at it. I second Luhbo.

Sure, the warning light comes on to tell you there is no oil pressure and that expensive parts no longer have enough oil to prevent direct metal to metal contact. But unless you were already at idle when it happened it is likely too late to prevent at least some damage from happening.

The actual numbers are not really important. Different dyno's, different operator's, different day's, different number's. My wife's V11 also managed to pull around 85 hp at the rear wheel. I don't really think that is that big a deal, but it is nice to see. The shape of the curves, both hp and torque, is the main thing. That dip he has in the 3500 - 4000 range, the more he can fill that in the better.

I have used two different brand Lithium batteries, Shorai and Anti-Gravity. I am sure they are both nice batteries, but the Anti-Gravity one seems better than the Shorai for my uses. But both of them, and all Lithium batteries in general, have certain drawbacks that can be an issue for some applications including mine. The main two issues I have are the way they act when cold and the lack of serious amps to start a hard to start bike. You can quote all kinds of specs on paper, but the harsh reality is they don't have as much ASS when it comes to CCA. The Shorai batteries worked well enough on my DRZ (since sold) but did not work on my Griso for shit (yes, I had the largest one they made at the time for my Griso, not the same one I used for my DRZ). The A-G battery seems to work better but it is not great. The weight savings sounds great but when you figure what kind of percentage it is of the total weight you realize it is not really making a difference. If it works well enough than great, they are cool. But it is not always nothing but roses.

For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. When the rear bevel drive box is try to accelerate the rear wheel that principle says that the opposing force is trying to rotate the bevel box in the other direction equal to the torque being applied to the wheel to rotate it forward. The whole deal about the pinion climbing the ring gear is a separate force and that force is not as much a factor as it is not a rotational force. When Guzzi added the floating bevel drive with the second U-joint it mostly took that force out of the equation. That force causes the rear to extend under acceleration when you do not have the floating rear drive and second u-joint as the swing arm sorta acts as a lever. It does not do that when the drive shat has the second u-joint.

Grade 2 is the "weight" of the Lithium grease as I understand it. I doubt it is that critical. I don't use any special grease, it is a pair of U-joints. There is nothing special about the application.

PCV is Power Commander 5, the current (I think) version of the Power Commander. PCV A/T is Power Commander 5 with their AutoTune module added. I agree about FI, Guzzi is not doing it themselves, they are subbing it out. But so did Buell, to the same people. And the Buell was less $$$ then a Guzzi. But the main point of that is that it could be done better. I ended up paying money after the sale to make my Griso work better, but my Buell came that way from the factory using a system from the same supplier as the lower grade version my Griso came with. And, mind you, me Buell was from 1999 and my Griso is an '07. You would think the newer one would be MORE advanced, not less.

Well, as mentioned, my Griso has a PCV and A/T (from Todd) and it works well. The wifes V11 has a PC3 with a custom map that I have since modified (as I found the custom map a little lacking in certain drivability situations). I had a really good custom map for it but when I got the heads done I took it to a different tuner (the first guy was gone) and forgot to pull the first map out and save it before the next guy took a stab at it. He did not do as good a job as the first guy (perhaps part of the reason he was gone, he spent way to much time on the wifes bike, great for me but bad for his bottom line) so I had to adjust it. A PCV with A/T would have taken care of that for me but they did not make them back then. But while I love the PCV and A/T idea (especially the A/T) I would not say it is the only way to get a well running Guzzi. I don't think the Guzzi lump is that finicky of a beast and a custom map could work just as well, perhaps with a ittle more effort then the A/T. But the A/T method is not without its fine tuning. You need to tell it the correct target air/fuel ratios to get the best out of it. WHile someone like Todd can get you very close, there is still room for fine tuning. The Buell was great as far as FI goes. Personally I think that the map they loaded in after the first one did not work well was not EPA legal. I think it was not lean enough. But it did work well and watching/feeling it correct the fueling was great. I wish other makes would work that well. The funny thing was I believe it was Weber/Marelli FI. Clearly they know how to make it work, why can't they make the one on my Guzzi work that well?

Running FI open loop (without an O2 sensor) is not the end of the world and should work well enough as long as the map is right. The cool thing about closed loop is the way it can correct a map that is not quite right. And, as I mentioned, watching my Buell correct the mapping after changing out the exhaust system was awesome. And that was with the stock narrow band O2 sensor. If only my Guzzi FI were that smart (actually, it is now, but that was only after I spent a large chunk of money on adding the PCV and A/T). I am a carb guy at heart. But I do see that FI has the potential to work much better then carbs and I do my best to embrace FI. To butcher a marine corp expression, you have to adapt, learn, and sometimes improvise.

While I agree that when coupled with some sort of wide band sensor and fuel modification based on that wide band sensor is a good thing, the stock set up with the narrow band sensor and fixed adjustment tables is somewhat lacking and probably does not actually help the motor run better. I had a Buell a while back with the OEM MM fuel injection set up. It was one of the best stock EFI systems I have used. The original map was a bit off but they quickly loaded a new map and the bike ran perfect. It also was a very smart system and you could feel it learning, say when you did something like swap exhausts. It would, at first, run a little rough but you could feel it smooth out and improve as you ran it through the gears a few times. The Guzzi system, even on the latest Guzzi's, is no where near as good. I do have a PCV with AutoTune on my Griso and it works well enough. But the system on my Buell did all that stock. The PCV/AutoTune set up is $$$. Running a fixed map set up with the stock narrow band sensor taken out of the loop (so to speak) could be a viable option for proper running for a lot less money. The main thing the narrow band set up brings to the table as used by Guzzi is reduced emissions. It does not really make it run better, smoother, or make more power.

Is this like PBS? Is this a fundraiser? Thanks for guilting me in to it, Docc. I didn't check what the exchange rate is, I hope 20 euros isn't something like $100.....

Jeez, I clicked on that link and looked at the ChronoClassic line before reading the next two posts. The price tag nearly gave me a heart attack. I am sure there stuff is really nice, they are certainly very proud of there stuff based on those prices. The SpeedHut stuff may or may not be as high end but they allow so many custom options I am surprised custom builders would pick MotoGadget over them. I reckon many of those custom builders don't know about SpeedHut or other automotive based suppliers that can do the custom work. Seems odd, but it is what it is.

Yea, the speedo sensor got wet and failed. It is usually a temporary failure and upon drying out it will come back. The failed speedo sensor trip the service light. There is much info about sealing the speedo sensor, making it water proof, on the internet. A good place to start is GuzziTech. But it is mostly just drying it out completely and sealing it with silicone.or some other such waterproofing agent.

WHY????? Somethings, like mirrors, I could see going with junk. But your brakes are not one of them.

A nods as good as a wink to a blind bat.

For the front brake M/C, perhaps one from a single disc V7. Not sure of the reservoir set up on that. There are also plenty of Ducati's, mainly entry level ones, that have a single front disc.

Maybe for someone in the UK / EU SpeedHut is not as good an option, but if the OP (or anyone else) types SpeedHut into the search bar on this site you will find that a few people have replaced their crappy stock speedo and / or tach with units from SpeedHut. They do custom graphics as well as a variety of color combinations. And they are well priced.

If you do that make sure you can remove your parts from the jig you welded. I know that seems obvious but I also know that with some pipe layouts you could end up unable to take it back apart. You might run into that with the bottom crossover section if your head pipes turn inward before they connect to the crossover. If so, then you would need to make it partially unbolt. If you dis-connect the electrics, especially the grounds, you should be able to weld with them in place. But it is obviously safer to remove any valuable electrical parts. In the past we have always had our custom exhaust fabricated directly on the bike. No jig used. But it is a viable way to go if it will work for the section you are building. Being able to remove is key.

A crossover is not a collector. A crossover simply allows for sharing, a collector merges the two (or more) flows together. You could then split the merged flows back apart after the collector, but if you don't have a collector and the flows never actually merge into one then it is not a two into one or two into one into two set up. X pipes and crossovers are in a different catgory from collectors. Within collectors there are many styles and types. More complex ones that do a better job of merging the flows result in better performance but tend to be more difficult to make and thus more expensive. The ones you see on production OEM and aftermarket systems are generally oriented more towards cheaper to build than working better.

The MGS-01 has asymmetrical headers but the Dr John is equal length. I think he was referring to the design, the way they are run, referring to the way they run down one side and not the other. Much like the way a swingarm can be asymetrical.

Other options would be either a set of flat bars or clubman bars. One of the great aspects of bars vs clip-ons is you CAN easily change to a different bend with a different riding position to go along with it. For the "Fat Bar" style bars the BillyBob and other modern bikes use there are a few good sources for bars. LSL/Spiegler, Renthal, and some others I can't think of at the moment. You can get adapters that allow you to fit a 7/8" bar in the 1 1/8" clamps, as well. That opens the door for more options but I prefer the fat bars. And I would not use Chinese built clip-ons or handle bars with a brand name watching them for quality control. Failure of a clip-on or handle bar while in use would be bad

See, if your bike was lighter it would not have fell so hard and may not have broken as much. Sorry to hear. I am only partially joking about the weight vs. falling thing. I can remember racing two strokes, both roadrace and dirt, and when you crashed them they did less damage to themselves because they had less inertia. My four stroke dirt bike would always bend the handle bars when I wrecked it seemed. My two stroke 440 still has the original stock bars.