JBBenson

OK, then the washer is on top of the geared spindle? Then how can it fall off? According to guzzimeister, you need a dap of grease to "pick up" the washer using the spindle drive....? I want to remove the housing and get the broken stud out of the little "cage" on top of the spindle drive. BTW, for those that installed Speedhut gauges, how did you cap off the transmission drive hole when you removed the speedo angle drive? Do you know the thread size and pitch? I was thinking of getting a nice cap or something.

It's insane how sensitive the V11 is to the TPS initial setting. If it's only a tiny bit off, the bike won't run properly. Took me a while to believe it.

Hellz ya.....I'll reach out when I'm there....! Ordered the simplest available. No logo, no schnick-schnack. Straight Business. With back button, silicone sealing. I asked for a yellow tick at 7k and red tick at 8k. Unfortunately, they don't remove the "Speedhut made in the USA" anymore........

F-it. Ordering Speedhuts now.

Yeah, I can get it home. Just super annoying getting a new part and then it self destructs immediately, far from home. The gears inside the drive are frozen, probably crumbled to bits. I think I'll try the later V11 cable first, after removing the broken piece. I would do Speedhuts now but so sick of spending money on the bike just want to ride and ride and ride. I'll do the Speedhuts in a bit when I have forgotten this fiasco. The most annoying thing? This bike is getting shipped to Atlanta next week, as Im on a longer term project and want to do some trips in that part of the country. So it means the bike and its new parts will have to meet there and get repaired later. But, all the suspension work I did, and the new handlebars and tires now make the Sport "sing", it's really fun to drive now, near neutral handling, and the motor runs like a sewing machine and pulls like a locomotive. Can't wait to hit the backroads of Georgia, Sweet Georgia...!

Meaning this one, from a later V11 Lemans, can screw directly into the transmission?

Thanks for the tip. Where is the thrust washer in this schematic?

Update, just got it out...! Wait, OK I think I got it. So that photo with the green background, that's what I will see if I remove the chrome nut from the transmission... Got it. Wondering if I should do this on the road. I would feel better if I found and removed the broken piece. However, if I remove the chrome nut and the broken piece falls further into the transmission, that will be the start of a very bad day. Very bad.

These photos are really helpful, thanks Docc. That broken angle drive post absolutely won't come out. Will that silver washer come out easily? Then maybe I can rock it back and forth a bit. I have put the bike in gear and peered down the hole while rolling the bike back and forth. I think I can see something turning in there. If so, that's good. But yes, there must be a piece stuck in there. If I remove this, what can I expect to see? That longitudinal gear and post sticking up? To receive the post sticking down from the angle drive?

Not sure if replacement or OEM, I got it from MG Cycle.

So, installed a new angle drive to fix my original that was leaking. Went for a drive out to the desert, doing the "Pines to Palms" highway, and on the way there my speedo stopped working. Also meaning my odometer stopped working too, which I use to gauge when its time to fuel. Huh. Well, no biggy, I can drive without a speedo. I drove another 140 miles and arrived in Thermal, CA. So I removed the angle drive and spun the cable, and the speedo jumped. So, the cable isn't broken. Then I removed the angle drive and saw this. The angle itself is frozen, it won't turn at all. So the question is: anybody run into this? Do I remove the chrome-nut-drive-housing on the transmission and pull the assembly out? What does the assembly look like? Can I drive home with it like this? I hope that the metal drive stud, when it breaks, DOESNT fall inside the transmission. Anybody know?

Pete's not wrong with his thoughts on journalists and pure numbers, I just think it doesn't matter that much: those people were never considering Moto Guzzi anyway. They are waiting for a KTM Ultra Adventure with 300 HP. It says "adventure" right on the tank. You can't go adventuring without 300 HP, everybody knows that. Guzzi has decided that the only way to win, is not to play. Like ScuRoo said, their stubbornness is a big part of their appeal.

I'll take better fuel economy. I was going to say "more HP" but I am of the school that it is more fun to drive a slow bike fast, than a fast bike slow. Same goes for cars. I recently drove a McLaren on one of those track day events. It was fun, and the car itself was impressive, but it all boiled down to point-and-hammer-throttle, point-and-hammer-throttle. There wasn't much finesse or skill needed, no perfect line to find and follow: the massive horsepower and grip made up for any deficiencies on my part. What I was thinking the whole time was, how fun would it be to take my old BMW 318Ti onto this same track to "she what she'll do" with her 1.8L chipped engine and 5 speed, winding her out, keeping her on the boil, and picking that perfect line to keep the speed up through the curves. That sounded fun. Yeah, and those paddle shifters on the McLaren? I don't get it, sorry. Lame.

Funny that the people who worry most about the horsepower figures are the same ones that say they don't care about the horsepower figures. Who cares? How fast do you wanna go anyway? The V85 will never compete with the GS, and Piaggio decided that they would never win against the "bench adventuring" crowd. So, they didn't bother. They built a simpler bike with a lot of flair and that great pushrod engine. If it turns out to not be a total POS, I will buy one. I might get one even then.... It's just what I want: an urban crossover bike with moderate off-road capabilities. They will sell more of these than those lame Roamers, that's for sure.

It seems mine didn't have that washer, so I added an o-ring, even though it wasn't leaking from that area. I figured it had a vent, I'll look for it......

"Pioggia"?

Rebuilt? Do tell! Well, I last changed the oil a while ago, and it just started leaking yesterday. I did consider that I overfilled it, and heavy traffic overheated the bike and caused the leak, but I think I would have seen it before, heavy traffic and hot weather being pretty common here. I will remove it and open it up. Are there o-rings in there?

After a spirited run today, I noticed that my speedo drive was weeping. Not because of my friendly thrashing, but because I suspect a small crack somewhere near the top. It must be a little crack, right? The oil wouldn't travel up from the threaded mount, would it? The angle drive being dirty and black and small, I can't see anything. Anybody run into this? (BTW the oil isn't in the middle of the sightglass due to it being on the sidestand)

Both the 170 and the 160 have a 60 sidewall. On paper, the 60 designates a percentage of the width, so the difference should be negligible, but a little research on my part shows my new tires being about 1/2” taller that the old 160. I’m not sure how exact the official numbers are. I do know that the 170 looks taller and fatter for sure, filling the rear fender/hugger better than before. It may be even taller, as the narrower tire needs to span the width of the rim, so it has to flatten out a bit to reach, so that may account for even more height, and the 170 makes more of a constant radius profile, which gives the linear feel that makes turning so much better now. Yes, we are talking about small measurements, but think about the difference that dropping the triples 8mm makes!

OK, having really wrung it out today, with a bike that is now (close to) neutral handling, all through the Malibu hills, (at speeds I care not to reveal publicly), I can safely ask: Who the f**ck's idea was it that a 160 rear on a Sport makes it handle better? I don't know about the longer frame LeMans, but putting a 160 on a Sport is probably the worst thing you can do: it lowers the rear, it gives a weird flatter-topped profile that makes the rear "tippy", and it introduces speedometer error. It also looks too small. Get rid of it! Put a 170 back on. If you have handling issues, address the other issues like forks, fork springs, dropping the triples, head bearings, and shock. Don't change the size of the tires. Just. Don't.

It's a delight! Dave told me he has them made by Dennis Stubbelfield Tools in L.A., CA, USA. No "index lines" were needed. The tool has a a nice *feel*. Yeah I got one of those off Ebay, makes the valve adjustment even easier. Its a good bit of kit.

I use the copper stuff on anything that gets very very hot....

This will be the first brand new bike I will buy in 25 years. It ticks all the boxes.

I know, it doesn't make sense, but having discussed a lot with Todd Eagan, he convinced me it would feel better if I raised the rear, having explained everything else I had done: dropping the front, respringing the forks, and 160 rear tire. So I ordered a Hyperpro 12mm longer than stock, (290mm vs. 278mm) with +/-5mm length adjustment. The 12mm extra was already way better, so I added another few mm's. Much better! Going back to the original 170 rear tire was really the kicker. Both the shock and larger rear tire just helped make the entire suspension quiet and less nervous. I like using a positive action to initiate turns, "push left to go left", so maybe some personal taste there. I don't like bikes that are too easy to turn. I have struggled a lot with getting this bike the way I wanted it. Having thought about the counter intuitive nature of the actions I took, I think that what is important is the relationship between rake, trail and frame length is what is important, not any one measurement. So maybe the shorter frame needs steeper rake to work together better.....? The best handling bike I have ever ridden was my 1st generation Aprilia Caponord, which was the most neutral handling bike I have ever ridden. I want the Sport to get close to this standard. Your weaving could be a few things, which I am sure you have already addressed. maybe try a longer shock and going back to a 170 rear? I also suspect it may be an aerodynamic issue with large, hard cases at high speed, it creates a lot of drag and a large low pressure area behind the bike, effectively lightening the front end. If it only weaves with the cases on, I would say its aerodynamic problem. The above mentioned Caponord handled differently when I had the rear cases on, they acted as a spoiler and made the front end very light above 60mph. I don't know a lot about suspensions either, but the changes I have made (most of them out of desperation) have made me want to keep the bike forever.

New tires! Got a set of Dunlop Roadsmart 3’s. After the rebate only 280 bucks installed. Also got angled valve stems at the same time. I went back up to a 170 rear in an attempt to slow the steering down a bit and it worked. Less of that tippy feeling and more planted in turns than before. Now it really handles well. I recommend anyone with a red frame bike raise the forks 10mm (dropping the front end), get a 10-15mm longer shock in the rear (which will raise the rear 20-30mm) and go back to a 170 tire (which will raise the bike another 1/4” in the back). Sure, this is all counter intuitive for a bike that has a “squirrelly handling” reputation, but it works. On that note, at it's core, what is not counter intuitive about Moto Guzzi...?