GuzziMoto

Sounds great. I hope you got to take some of the smaller twistier roads on the trip. The wife and I recently did our anual trip out to Indianapolis for the MotoGP races. The track is only average but the set up for spectators as well as the way they throw a party makes it great. The roads we can take to get there and back are absolutely awesome. This past trip was 1500 miles round trip with very little of that on highways. Most were two lane roads and less.

It certainly is possible that there is a fitment issue. His bike appears to be a later black frame bike, but there could still be some sort issue with regard to how it is fitting on the bike and resolving that (if present) could help. Is the tank sitting on the tank freely or is there any pressure being applied to it?

Not sure why you would blame ethanol if he said "I avoid fuel that contains ethanol". Possibly a defective tank, or maybe there is something else in the fuel that would do that. Ethanol is not the only thing being added to gasoline nowadays. As far as what to do about it, there have been a few people, myself included, that have drained the tank, let it thoroughly dry out, then sealed it with a tank sealer like Casewell epoxy tank sealer. I don't know how others have turned out but the one I did is working well so far.... Time will tell. There are at least two people making aluminum tanks, but one is in the UK and the other I think is in Europe. One thing to consider is I have heard there are short tanks for the red frame bikes and slightly longer tanks for the rest. Not sure if that is true (I only have the wifes red frame version) but it makes sense.

As I recall the early Daytona's have 18" wheels front and rear (shame on me for not being sure as I have one, but I no longer have the stock front end on it but I know for sure the rear wheel is an 18 incher). At some point they switched to 17" wheels. The Daytona and Daytona RS are the same basic bike but the RS is the end model with all the good bits and improvements that they came up with. The original front forks on the early version (mine) was horrible. The later versions may be better. But I swapped to a GSXR 1000 front end, complete with lightweight wheel, radial brakes, stupidly rigid forks, and what not. Way better then any front end on any version of the Daytona. They are truly cool motorcycles that hark back to a different feel. The V11 is great, more refined and a better day to day motorcycle. But the Daytona has a raw feel and is deceptively fast. My favorite bike.

It looks like a 400cc version of a V65 Lario. 4 valve heads.

Sorry if this is a dumb question, but why do you lose the charge idiot light when swapping to a Ducati alternator. The charge idiot light is from the regulator/rectifier. Do you mean swapping to the Ducati R/R and does it not support the light? I have Ducati style R/R's from Electrosport on two different Guzzi's and both still have the light.

My experience with those carbs is from Ducati Roadracers and Supermoto's. I have not put them on a Guzzi, yet. They are really nice carbs, that make all the right noises and work really well once set up correctly. About the only negative aspect to them is the cost of parts like jets tends to be relativelyhigh. But once you have them jetted correctly that should no longer be an issue. I agree that not having a pressurized airbox makes it easier, not harder, to use and set up these carbs. And I don't think the lack of ram air is an issue on a Guzzi. I would not hesitate to switch to the FCR's if I had a carbed big block. But the only carbed Guzzi at my house is a Lario. I think even the 39's might be too big for that one. As for forks, when I needed to upgrade/fix the conventional forks on my Daytona I swapped them to a set of late model GSXR1000 forks. The lighter front wheel, better brakes, and changes to the geometry (steeper rake and more trail), all contributed to a large improvement. Much more then I could have ever gotten out of the stock forks. And it set me back $600 for the front end including the wheels along with $350 for a high end Brembo master(that was just a cherry on the sundae). I am sure you could spend less on upgrading the stock forks on your bike. I would send them to your preferred suspension guy for that.

I do not recall ever seeing a carb that did not have vents for the float bowl. It is pretty much standard to vent the area above the fuel in the float bowl. Not all of them have had nipples for the vent lines, many CV carbs have internal venting back to the intake bell. That is pretty much the same as venting to the airbox. Where do your carbs vent the float bowls? On the FCR's I have seen the float bowl vents were about halfway up the main carb body on both sides of the slide area. Here is a link to an exploded view of one. http://www.pbase.com/jdjetting1/image/53264343 You can see the nipples for the vents about half way up the sides of the carb body. It has been a while since I have played with a 39 FCR but last one I saw I was pretty sure it had vents. That was on a supermoto. Either way, unless you spend a good bit of your riding above 100 mph I would not worry about it and just jet it correctly. Typically you should be running leaner jets and needles in a 39 FCR then you would in a 41 FCR for the same motor. Something to do with the increase in intake vacumn that results from the reduction in carb size.

I would think all you need to do to "pressurize the float bowls" is to run the vent lines into the airbox. That way the float bowl and the airbox would be at the same pressure. Do your carbs not have nipples on the vents where you can put a hose on? That would be unusual in my experience. As you are probably already aware, a smaller carb typically needs slightly leaner jetting for the same motor then the larger carbs do. Sounds like you are going in the right direction. How did you end up with 39's?

As someone who still owns a KTM 440EXC I love the big bore two strokes. Good to see one still being ridden in anger. My first (and only) SLR was a Pentax K1000. Unfortunately, unlike the 440, I do not still have it.

In the US the cam issue seems to be resolved. But in parts of Europe like France they still seem to have an issue. Not sure why. I think the mechanical reasons for failures have been identified and a solution is available. But for some reason or other there still seem to be people reporting issues. Not many, and they seem to be in certain regions. Possible bad dealer support or lack of proper oil? I don't know. I don't find the clutch heavy on my Griso, it is about the same or better then the other Guzzi's I have. It is a nice hydro clutch. About the only part that needs lubing is the clutch lever pivot. But I don't know about the Stelvio. Never had an interest in a motorcycle SUV. Somewhat useless.

To me the 4 valve Daytona motor feels like a hot rod tractor. It is deceptively fast, but it feels like it is just lopping along, plowing the field. Tractor pull here I come...... The other thing to add is that my comparison to a V11 is to the early red frame version which has more aggressive geometry, at least compared to the later black frame versions. The stock geometry of the Daytona is closer to the later V11's. Honestly, while I own a Griso 1100 and am mostly happy with it (sometimes I wish they had put the Daytona motor in it like the original prototype had), there really isn't another current model Guzzi I would buy. But if you want a cool Guzzi and get the opportunity to buy a Daytona or a Centuaro I highly recommend it. They do need a little more care and attention, if for no other reason then their age, but there is a rawness of character that the newer bikes lack.

I have a '93 Daytona and the wife has a red frame V11, among others. The basic layout and feel of both of them are not that different. But apart from the difference in the 4 valve motor compared to the 2 valver's, there is also differences in rear wheel diameter between the older versions and the newer ones. All in all while my Daytona, which has been modded in a cafe fashion, handles a lot like my wife's V11 it has a much more long legged feel. It is deceptively fast, easily blowing past 80 without feeling like it is even trying. It is not a completely different beast, but it is clearly not the same. It does feel longer (it is), but with the steeper rake and increased trail of the GSXR front end it manages to hang with the V11 in the twisties. Without that it did steer noticeably slower. The difference between the gearboxes also adds to the different feel but again my Daytona has been modded, the gearbox internals have been swapped to a set out of a Bassa. It shifts much better now. The carb and injected versions of the Sport are not likely to be substantially different but I leave that question to someone with more direct knowledge of them.

All the ones I have are on/off switches. It may be that yours needs the switch cleaned but that is all it probably is, a float switch. On both of my spine frames it mounts through the bottom of the tank, but then mine are external fuel pump versions. If you have an internal fuel pump it would likely be part of the pump assembly, follow the wires.

I would think a bike with a higher content of aluminum and stainless steel would be better, but any bike in that environment is going to have a hard time.

Checked my sag this evening and with spring set at 152MM between the adjuster rings I have about 25-26 mm sag. So I think that spring should be pretty close yes? I'm thinking a simple rebuild should do. Maybe some slight revalving. The shaft seal is replaceable isn't it? Please either re-read my post or google setting sag (I take no responsibility for what results you get, though.....). The race sag alone means nothing with regard to your spring rate. You have to measure both. After you set your race sag, how much the bikes sags with the rider on board, then measure your free sag, how much it sags under just the weight of the bike. If your race sag is around 25 - 30% of total travel then your free sag should be around 5 - 10% OTT. If it is more then that your spring is too stiff, less then that your spring is too soft. Street riders tend to shoot for the 30% / 10% OTT numbers and some racers like closer to the the 25% / 5% OTT side. As for what you choose to do, it depends on you resources ($$$) as well as your requirements. The stock shock is pretty average. It holds the rear of the bike off the ground and mostly keeps things under control. A higher quality shock like an Ohlins (even a low end Ohlins is a very nice shock, they do not make cheap shocks) or a Penske is a definite improvement but if you are happy with the stocker then a nicer shock would not be required. It depends on how you ride and what you expect. A shock seal is usually a pretty universal thing based on dimensions. As my Sachs cracked at the lower mount, as they are prone to doing, I did not even look to see if the seals are available but rather went the upgrade route.

The stock Sachs shock has a bad habit of cracking at the lower shock mount. There are many good options. Having the stock shock rebuilt is probably the cheapest, but not the best. The Ohlins option seems to be getting harder to find, but companies like Penske are more then happy to build you a high quality shock to match your requirements (weight, riding style, etc.). To see if you need a stiffer or lighter spring you need to set your sag. Setting sag tells you if your spring is too soft, too hard, or just right, based on how much free sag you have (how much the bike sags under its own weight without the rider) after you have set the race sag (how much the bike sags with the rider on board) to the correct amount. It is not something you need to guess about. FYI,,,, When Penske built a shock for our V11 the spring rate was not much different then what was on the original Sachs shock.

In my experience the wires for the electric petcock are fragile and prone to breaking right where they come out of the petcock. You should switch to a mechanical petcock. Who is paying for it I don't know, but it is not beyond the realm of possibilities that the wire was ready to go and it just happened to be at the dealer when it finally let go.

The top shock eye is the one that attaches to the fatter shock body. It is also the end that has the reservoir attached. The lower eye (the one that should be closer to the rear tire) is the one that attaches to the skinnier shock shaft. The idea is that the shock shaft is the part that moves with the rear suspension and the fatter shock body should be mounted to the bike.

My experience with this.... Do not leave a plastic gas tank with fuel in it sitting for any length not mounted on the bike. I have had an issue with my Griso where I left it for a couple weeks not bolted up. It did not want to mount up when I got around to it. I have had the same issue with others. Empty the tank if you are going to let it sit unmounted for any length of time. The wifes V11 tank finally started showing signs deformation. I let it sit for a couple months over the winter empty and then coated it with the Casewell fuel tank sealer. That seemed to bring the tank back close to where it should be and we will see how well it holds up. I am curious, the original post was from a guy in the UK. I did not think they used ethanol in their fuel. Ethanol is what most seem to blame the tank distortion issues on.

I would not say that it requires more effort than other ecus. Alas, as things are, most people use the additional options it offers for screwing up things rather than optimise them. Hubert First you have to build it, or you can pay Cliff to build it for you. Then you have to load it. Then you have to tune it. That is more work and commitment then either the stock ECU or the stock ECU and PC3. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of it and I have bought two kits from Cliff (but I have not finished building either). I think it is a great option, but it does not seem to be plug and play like the other two.

Another option is Cliff and his MyECU. It is fully programmable and can do alot but does require more effort then the other options

Yes I have got it going, thanks for asking. I have only put about 300 miles on the mods so far. The Bassa gears seem to work well in the Daytona case. Much quieter and smoother shifting. It does not feel like I expected, I thought the Bassa gears would be shorter. First gear feels shorter but the rest don't feel that different. But it had been too long since I last rode it with the stock gears that I could be wrong. I still have a little work to do to it in order to have it for the National Rally in Buena Vista, Va. I hope to make that.

My wife and I have four Guzzi's total, a '93 Daytona, a Lario, a red frame V11, and a Griso. Not one of them currently has a steering dampener. The Daytona and the V11 came with them from the factory but we prefer the lighter handling that comes with the dampener removed. Plus the stock dampener on the V11 developed stiction and that made the bike wobble. I have never ridden a Guzzi that really needed one for geometry reasons. They all pretty much have conservative steering geometry. Whether you want one or not is up to you, I would at least try it without to see if you like it. It will steer faster and lighter without it and that may or may not be to your liking.

It takes more then 93 octane to be able to run high compression ratios. You need a good combustion chamber design. Stock Guzzi's do not have a good combustion chamber design. There is room for improvement that you can do, but they are pretty much a stone age motor. For them 10.5:1 is pretty high. V11's are right on the verge of detonation as it is. As to the tank and will it distort, who knows. It may be fine for a long time and then they change the witches brew that is modern in your area and then it has a problem. I have no more idea if you will ever have a problem then I know whether or not using that Sta-bil stuff will prevent it. I am not sure what is causing the tank issues now. People say it is the ethanol, but I have yet to see any actual evidence one way or the other. I suspect it is a combination of additives in the fuel but I have no more proof of that then others have proof it is the ethanol.