GuzziMoto

The only problem with what your saying is that "W" has done more crap that is unconstitutional and infringes on our constitutional rights then any other president I can think of. Yet you seem to think that it is only the democrats that do that sort of thing. I would agree that the federal goverment is too big and spends too much of our money, but to suggest that it is only the democrats that are to blame is absurd. The only difference between the two parties is HOW they spend our money and WHICH parts of the goverment grow.

And they added a cross-over pipe in front of the engine. The front cross-over adds a point of failure, they tend to rattle and/or crack.

To me a gun ban means just that, BANNING guns. That would be stupid. What types of guns are allowed is regulating guns, and that is a horse of a different color. Arguing gun regulation is a waste of time in most cases. Most people already have their ideas about what is right and what is wrong and what you say will not change anything. My only issue with what Skeeve said was that the constitution is clear and definitive about the right to bear arms and there is no room for interpretation. The fact that in the DC case before the supreme court 5 justices voted that it was un-constitutional and 4 voted that it wasn't proves that the 2nd amendment is not free from interpretation and that there is room for it. If one more justice thought it was constitutional it would have gone the other way.

One of my favorite quotes from one of my favorite movies, People should not be afraid of their goverment, goverment should be afraid of it's people. When I saw that movie for the first time I could not believe how much of it was actually happening (I did not see it in the theatre) and how erie it was.

At this point I think it is safe to say that while we do not completely agree on how the second amendment should be interpreted (but we are not that far apart), I hope we can both agree that it is something that must be interpreted. Indeed, that is what the supreme court is for. Just as they must interpret the most important amendment, the first amendment. I am not one for debate on the merits of a gun ban like England has, I do not believe that is likely to happen in my lifetime. The original question was, is the 2nd amendment clear and unequivocal as written. My opinion is that it requires interpretation and that interpretation has changed over the course of this country, as evidenced by the changes in gun laws over the course of this country. I do not support gun bans nor am I a gun nut. I do own guns, but I think owning a gun is a responsibility both to the individual and to society. It is a powerful thing.

I believe the loop thru the woods is gone now. Not just not used, but gone.

The relays are in plain view under the seat. It is a good idea to keep spares around as a failure in some of these can stop the bike dead. If you pull the seat and see five little relays in a row and any of them say "Siemens" on them, replace them as soon as possible. Otherwise, it is just a matter of good practice to keep spares of those around. The ones from DPGuzzi.com have a lot of research into what would work best, the stock Siemens ones do not and WILL fail. But that is just good general practice. I don't think it applies to your running issue. That sounds like a case of the bike being a bit lean at that rpm and throttle postion. It could be a stock map (they are lean at the bottom and too rich at the top stock) or one custom made for your bike (just because its a custom map does not mean it is perfect), either way those symptoms are typical of being lean. It could also be a tps issue, particularly since they pulled the old one out. If they did not set the new one up quite right while installing it that could be it. A mis-set tps, along with out of sync throttle bodies, is likely to be more of an issue at smaller throttle openings and go away as the throttle is opened farther. As others mentioned, I would suggest you learn to work on the bike yourself. Guzzis are reliable bikes but they do tend to have certain flaws that need to be worked out and it can be expensive and difficult to have this done by others. Often it takes a more intimate knowledge of the bike and what it is doing to correct these issue then a mechanic is likely to have. Not saying it cannot be done, just that paying others to fix the bike can be the harder more expensive way. If I where you I would, in order, check the valve clearances, check the TB sync (or pay someone to, that is much harder then the valves and you need special tools), check and set if needed the TPS (there is a range for this setting and room for adjusting, small changes can make a difference in how the bike runs). If none of that works, I would start to consider getting a PowerCommander or other such tuning aid to correct the issue. Good luck and keep at it. Once sorted these bike are some of the most rewarding bikes out there.

It is a shame they altered that track. It was up there as one of the great tracks and now it appears to be but a shadow of its former self. Many great races in many forms of motorsports have happened at the old Hockenheimring. My favorites were some of the 500cc GP races from the late 80's and early 90's from there.

First off, that post WAS way too long for me to bother reading, sorry. Learn to be more concise and I'll read your posts. Second, I am not against guns, I keep them myself. All I said was that the second amendment does not say that the goverment shall not enact laws that regulate or restrict the gun trade. What it says is "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.". How you interpret this is up to you. You posted evidence of other people backing up your interpretation of this. That is fine. But you did not even address my point, which was that in the end it comes down to how our society interprets this or any other constitutional amendment. They, like all our laws, are only words. It is the meaning given to words that means something. What it means to you may not be the same as it means to me. But it is how they are interpretted that counts. My point was that there have been restrictions, thru law, on guns since atleast the mid 19th century in this country. We as a society have decided that the goverment can regulate arms in this country. If you do not agree with that I'm sure you will post another novel on how wrong I am. But the fact is there have been laws regulating guns for a long time. How much the goverment is allowed to regulate guns is where the issue of opinion comes in. Some people opinions count more then others, but everybody is allowed to have their own opinion on this. That is one of the most important aspects of this country. It is what makes America what it is. Freedom of thought. Now, while your opinion on how the second amendment should be read has been made reasoably clear (but not completely as you never answered the question on whether you think the goverment has any right to regulate arms at all or if you are just of the normal right wing approach) please do not attack my interpretation of it, since I have not even told you what it is. Again, my point was not HOW the second amendment should be interpretted, but that it IS interpretted and will always be interpretted (and that interpretation may change as times change).

First off, that post was way to long to bother reading in its entirety. But I will assume it went on and on in support of your view. There are two parts of the 2nd amendment. The first part references a militia, the second part is the part gun rights people always quote. To me it says you have the right to bear arms in a militia in defence of your coutry, and you do. To you it says you have the right to own guns. But the reality of the amendment is there has been some control of arms for a long time in this country and you would have to be very far out of the norm to think that is wrong. The question for most is where do you draw the line? Are hand guns to be regulated? Are automatic assult rifles? Are 50 caliber machine guns? What about rocket launchers, cannons, or bombs? The line is drawn somewhere, exactly where depends on the individual. If you think all modern arms should be unregulated, then this is a waste of time and you are never going to listen to anyone elses opinion on this.

I have read the 2nd amendment many times, but have never noticed it forbiding any federal firearms laws. In fact, it is a very vague amendment that without interpretation says very little. Thus, the debate. Your interpretation of it may not be the same as someone elses.

I don't have the measurement for you, but I would bet that any modern Italian bike with a Brembo clutch master would use the same size res.

I have seen F1 and MotoGP in person (I saw WSB in person but that was back in the early '90's). Both are spectacular, MotoGP because the racing is good and the bikes are fast, F1 because the cars are the fastest things around a roadcourse and the drivers talent to drive the cars that fast is amazing. The big problem for me with WSB is they went the route of slowing the racing down so that more riders could run the pace. To some this is good, it makes for closer racing. But I would rather see faster bikes and fewer guys able to run the pace. Don't get me wrong, I would go watch a WSB race if it were near me, but I would not ride for two days each way to see it (unless it was a sweet ride, then I might do it for any excuse) like I do for F1 and MotoGP.

I met him at Daytona back in '94 I believe. We were racing in the AHRMA BOTT races together (he as an owner/creator, me as a racer). What impressed me the most was that while he was clearly brilliant and much smarter then I, he talked to me about his bike and what he had planned for the future with it in a manner that made you feel like an equal part of the conversation. He did not talk down to you as some smart people do. You felt like an equal, even though you knew you weren't. Going through the tri-oval on my 750, Andrew Stroud came by on the Britten. I thought it was going to be cool to watch it go through the infield (since I was on the track at the same time most of the time, I did not get to see much of it in action that year), but by time I got through turn one it was gone. Amazing.

Not only did we not recover under Reagan, but we suffered for four more years under Bush senior. There was no ray of sunshine at the end of Reagans terms, the only people who did well under him and B.S. (Bush senior) were people who already had money. The lower and middle classes suffered until Clinton. Don't get me wrong, I am not a left wing liberal nut. I am somewhere in the middle of the road. But I come from lower middle class roots and still live there. My family suffered under Reagan. My wifes family suffered under Reagan. Things were good under Clinton. Politics and indescretions (I don't care who is f*ing the president, as long as he isn't screwing us)aside,under Reagan and B.S., debt went up and GNP went down. Under Clinton, the debt went down and the GNP went up. Now we're back in debt and out of work. Will the new president be able to turn things around like Clinton did? I doubt it but I hope so.

"Success" as in at the start of his 8 years, we were in a deep hole, with record national debt and unemployment. After 8 years of the Clinton way, we had successfully paid off most of the debt aquired in the previous 12 years and unemployment was down to a low level. "Is" as in after 8 years of the Bush way we is in a deep hole again. If you don't like the Democratic moral philosophy I can understand. But clearly on a well being of the country philosophy the country has done better under Clinton then it did under Reagan, Bush, or Bush. I don't understand how the Republicans are supposed to be the party of smaller goverment and fiscal responsibility, yet under them the national debt goes up?

As said before, I don't have much hope for Obama changing/fixing things. But getting help from Clintons administration, one of the most successful Presidents we've had in a long time, can't be a bad thing. He'll need all the help he can get. On a different note V For Vendetta is one of my favorite movies. There was so much truth in that movie. I do agree that if you think the most important thing about Obama is the color of his skin, you are a racist.

I thought he was the better choice, and I voted for him. But I have no faith that he will do anything substantially different then the rest. He is a politician just like the others. He makes pretty speaches. But so far he has continued to support the status quo. I hoped he might make a stand on the increase in the finanial bailout, or speak up on the auto maker loan package (unlike the financial bailout, they would pay us back). He seems more concerned with his image then with substance. I don't think anything will really change. Tomorrow I will be in the same amount of debt I am today (actually slightly deeper due to interest), the banks will likely be in less debt tomorrow (thanks in part to my tax dollars). The american public will continue to get screwed.

Most brake fade is the brake fluid getting too hot. But that does not mean the pads aren't a factor. Some pads generate a lot more heat then other pads and will be more likely to have the problem. There are racing brake fluids that can take the heat better then the standard stuff, in the US the best fluid I have found is Wilwood. It does not last but it can take the heat well. So many pads nowdays are made for stainless discs and are not suited for cast iron. They generate too much heat and wear the discs out too fast. But they are geared for supersport racing where they have to run the stock discs.

Brilliant!!!

It has not finished in Dakar four times since the rally started. It has not started in Paris more then that. It makes no difference to me where it starts or where it ends. It is the toughest race in motorsports and to even compete in it is an accomplishment, to finish is a victory.

It has not gone too Dakar many times, this is nothing new. The name Dakar has become a brand. Whether it ends in Dakar or not no longer is important. Get over it. The name Dakar has come to stand for the longest and most gruelling race in motorsports. It has not refered to where the rally ends for a while.

As I understand it, a bunch of gear shift shafts were machined too large in diameter. That causes the spring to break. Replace the shaft of have it turned down to the correct size.

I think if you want to push your mumbo jumbo on others, that's fine. Please start another thread in the correct place. This is a thread on V11 cush drives.

Ahhh... Good to have ya back, Ratchet (I think). I missed The Ministry of Information (MisInfo for short).