Lucky Phil

Plenty of other life tasks to do docc. I've been chipping away at stuff working out orientation of the injectors so they clear the airbox and the other stuff crammed into the under tank area. For some reason I thought i could orientate them any direction to suit the wiring for the connector plug......wrong. So after much trial and error taking into consideration wiring length, connector plug clearance, airbox clearance, ability to remove the airbox without interference from the injectors and their plugs I settled on positioning that requires extending the cabling for the l/h injector. What a PITA, I hate doing this as it ends up with wiring with ridged points and its tricky with the loom on the bike space wise. I've had the airbox on and off about a Gagillion times checking clearances for the above plus the lay of the wiring loom which has been disturbed and the fuel line from the tank to the pump. I hate this stupid line with its lack of flexibility, It makes tank removal a pain and messy but I cant think of a cure. I bought an inline check valve for it but its too short to use as the CV takes up about 50mm in the line. Pulling the tank on the V11 is such a PITA Id love the later tank but its no go for mine. As I've mentioned before its a whole nother ball game putting together a "special" as compared to a stocker, nothing seems to go together easy:) Fitted up the rear end so progress is happening. Ciao

Hi Mike I got my injectors cleaned by Aznew 3/56 Smith rd Springvale and used VHT primer and cast iron engine paint. I cant yet comment on its durability. Ciao

Do they normally operate smoothly in both directions Pete or is this a case of doing something thats not normally done and highlighted a normal condition that isn't normally noticed? Wouldnt surprise me if Guzzi concentrated the grinding and lapping precision on the drive side of the gears only and the overrun faces are just what they are. Ciao

Ok so spinning the back wheel in a forward direction isn't the same for the bevel gears as under throttle in the forward direction. Its not loading the gears in the direction that is normal for transmitting engine power, its operating the gears on the back faces in the overrun condition. I dont know if this whirring is normal in that overrun condition and my bike is in pieces and I cant check it but it seems to me that its more important to have the smooth operation under power than on the overrun as you have. Ciao

If you are spinning the crown wheel in a backwards or what would be a reverse direction (not via the pinion shaft but by driving the crown wheel or back wheel itself) you are in fact loading the driving faces of the gears. If you spin the crown wheel in a forward direction you are loading up the back face or overrun side of the gears. So in fact the driving direction of the gear set when driven by the engine/transmission in your case will be silent. Is this how you are driving the gear set or do you mean fwd and reverse via the input shaft. Hopefully Pete Roper will chime in and I haven't confused the issue. Ciao

Ha, yes docc I lost track of the thread we were on,doh. I'd love to sit down with someone from the design team from the V11 era just to talk to them about the changes they made and the rationale behind them. I've experienced the different changes Ducati 2 valve and 4 valve belt driven twins go through over a long period and although they took one or two wrong turns those turns were always in search of improvements often based on what worked for racing. The overwhelming majority of Ducati evolution I saw was rational and easily understood and addressed known issues.Mostly it was about engineering and some was directed at broadening their customer base by making ownership and servicing easier and cheaper. With Guzzi they seemed to be stuck in a narrow furrow where they had their specific demographic and were to afraid to step outside it for fear of alienating them. Bit like BMW up till the K series bikes. A lot may well have been down to revolving door parent ownership of the company and lack of resources requiring them to stick to their little furrow. Being owned by an investment company for 5 or 6 years was the best thing that ever happened to Ducati. Ciao

Ok cool scudd thanks. We need to make a special thread with images for this topic. Ciao

So scudd did your black framed bike with the old style tank have the later type front triangulated engine support and the forward projecting gearbox supports? I always just referred to the tank sizes by frame colour as I thought all the black framed bikes with the different front support and the gearbox support extensions had the internal pump arrangement for the tank. It seems your black frame had the extra supports but missed out on the newer tank. A changeover period for tanks it seems. Ciao

Yes docc they are a bastard to fit for sure even with the bike half disassembled. Ciao

I suspect the later lower gearbox brace was needed as a result of changing the front engine support frame. I dont think the later front support frame offers the same degree of longitudinal control of the engine and therefore they added the rear longitudinal additions under the gearbox. With Guzzi I personally think you need to understand that there is some other sort of engineering rationality going on at this time. The additional cross brace added at the new gearbox mount that you can see only in the parts diagram is another example of added structure that doesn't seem to have any function. This is an engineering and design department that seemed to think that all their bikes needed to be engineered to drag sidecars and or trailers around. Some things they did at this time made no engineering sense at all. Ciao

I'm about to burst your bubble Scud and put this to bed forever and add to the data base. I have 2 second hand and one brand new (never seen fuel) later tanks and 1 brand new (never seen fuel) old style tanks and the original on my bike. I have just laid the tape measure on my original tank and brand new late tank and i can tell you they are dimensionally very different. I'll post some images with tape measures attached so we can align with your frame length images. My feeling is that you could fit an earlier tank to a later frame but not the other way around without losing steering lock. My bike now has the modified fwd mounts fitted which reduces my steering lock anyway and if I fit the later type tank I'd end up with pretty much zero lock.So comparatively you loose quite an amount of fork leg to tank clearance on full lock when you fit the later tank to the earlier frame and from my experience of my bike with std mounts I only had 5mm clearance tank to fork leg anyway on full lock. So ctr of aft mount bolt to fwd edge of tank....old style 620mm, new 660mm EDIT.....if you look at the front edge of the fwd mount you can see where the difference is. Note the extra length from the fwd tank mount forward edge to the fwd tank section where the tape is resting. It appears there is an extra 40mm here but the forward projections are about the same. I believe they have lengthened the top of the tank 40mm and moved the cap opening forward 20mm but the tank length overall is the same give or take. Note how in these images how the front forward projections seem to sweep back a lot more on the green tank than the grey later tank. This is in line with the overall length being roughly the same but the top face being extended forward to close the gap to the steering head around where the breather banjo is on the upper frame. Looks like scudd may be correct although I'd be interested to see if the later tank on the earlier frame limits the steering lock. As I said the later tank wont work with my new setup. Dont be fooled by the camera angle, centre of aft mount hole to ctr of cap, old tank 295mm, new tank style 315mm 315mm aft ctr mount hole to cap ctr. Once again camera angle. Fwd tank edge in the ctr(not the projecting sides) to cap ctr 315mm, old style tank 295mm Old style fwd ctr edge to cap ctr 295mm The dimensions from the back of the fwd mounts to the forward most edge of the tanks are virtually the same. So its like they sliced the ctr filler cap section out of the tank fwd and aft and added two 20mm plugs to lengthen it. One fwd and one aft of the filler cap. Just like when they stretch the fuselage of a heavy jet Full sized images are in my album. Ciao

Yes it looks a nice unit. The only Guzzi's that came with Carrillos as std fitment were the Centauro's, Daytonas and MGS-01 as far as I know. Even then they used the rods with the larger big end bolts than std Carrillos. I just think advertising something should be accurate is all. Ciao

No one here drinks Fosters, horrible stuff. We only make it for foreigners. Ciao

Productive day today, got the tank mount finished. Titanium bolts and bushes except for the top ones on the rubber mounts which I made from Ally. I used 18mm hex so I can hold it with a wrench when tightening up the mount bolts. I couldn't buy any hex Ti bar. The four lock nuts are just that lock nuts only. I tapped the vertical plates for the 4 6mm bolts. The whole thing is a bit as they say "component dense" but there you go. Battery holder fitted with ti bolts. Such a great material. Elastic,tough,light and weather resistant. Swing arm fitted. I removed the horrid huger nuts and used rubber blanks instead. Fully adjustable Wilbers shock. Better quality than an OEM Ohlins and cheaper as well. Swing arm other side. Ciao