V11 Suspension.......Or is it Geometry

[GuzziMoto]

I have no doubt that some red frame Guzzis can or will wobble. I have only ridden 3, and none of them wobbled. But since I have not ridden all of them I defer on that to people who have ridden one that wobbled. But the real question is WHY do they wobble (the few that do) and did Guzzi change the geometry to stop them from wobbling.

First the why part. Lets see, stock geometry of a red frame Guzzi is pretty conservative by todays standards. Even when they were new they were not pushing the boundaries of geometry. Plus you have the question of "If it is the geometry that causes them to wobble why don't they all wobble, since they all have the same geometry?". The answer would appear to be that it was not the geometry causing some of them to wobble. If it was then since all the red frame V11s share the same geometry they would all wobble. They don't so it is not. But there are many other things that could cause a bike to wobble. It could be a frame rigidity issue. Again, the same process of commonality tends to rule that out. But it is possible that some frame were lacking in that dept due to incorrect bolting up or flawed frames. I cannot say that is not the case so that I cannot rule out. What else causes wobbles. Well, it can be due to anything from tire pressure to rider technique, poor suspension setup to faulty steering dampers. But one thing is for sure, it has to be something that is unique to the ones that wobble and not something shared with those that don't. This rules out a few things, like geometry.

Now as for why Guzzi changed the geometry of the later bikes (and as I recall, they did not across the board switch but actually they sold both variants during the transition. This also tends to rule out the theory that the red frame bikes were prone to crashing). I would venture a guess that they received some bad press from the Euro mags as well as customer feed back that cried for a more traditional steering feel. The bad press from the Euro mags part is easy to believe as I have seen them do the same to other bikes that were perfectly fine when rode correctly, but the Euro press (at least some of them) seem to feel it is their job to ride the test bikes in whatever stupid or crazy manner they can in an effort to make the bikes misbehave and then if it does they slam the bike for being dangerous and/or flawed. I will admit that this sells magazines, but it has little to do with the actual quality of the bikes, unless you think that we need to be saved from ourselves. I would guess that the bad press (if it really happened, I am only guessing) coupled with customer feedback calling for a slower steering, more traditional Guzzi feel, triggered the change. Probably more to do with customer feedback then bad press, judging by the gradual changeover rather then a sudden switch.

But, I reckon this is all a waste of time as I doubt Greg or Hack will change their minds on this. In the end we all have to make our own decisions about what we believe and we typically base that on our own experiences. In the end, my experiences are that I have been thrown off 3 bikes in a wobble. None were Guzzis. One was a TL1000R (they tend to wobble when you put slicks on them), one was a FZR 400 (it only did it because it suffered a flat tire which triggered the wobble, in spite of geometry more aggressive then a red frame V11) and the last was a Sportster (which did it because I screwed with the geometry in an effort to make it handle). None of the wobbles were the bikes fault. Some people like to blame the bike but I know it was my fault in all three cases.

But I also know that a red frame Guzzi is NOT inherently unstable and if it wobbles there is something wrong (with the bike, the rider, or both).

[docc]

And, again, the early Red Frames didn't wobble, but they might weave mightily at speed.

 

I don't know that there's been another Guzzi quite as demanding to set up and ride as the 1999-2001 Red Frame V11 Sport.

 

Just my 67,000 miles worth . . .

[luhbo]

And, again, the early Red Frames didn't wobble, but they might weave mightily at speed.

. . .

 

Exactly! That's the point.

I own a 2000 KR and it's running straight and stable even above 200 km/h, or with luggage and/or me in a "wobbling" rain suit (in these cases it unfortunately doesn't reach such speeds )

But I know of others that had weaving problems. One is nearly 2m tall. He claims that his very early KR needed the complete Autobahn above 150 and it took quite some activities to make the bike stable in the end. You can guess, with a rider of this size there isn't much weight left on the front wheel at higher speeds resp. sag becomes very small. Don't know what he did exactly but since some years he is a happy owner, also at max. speeds.

 

Exactly that were the articles which where published in the German press. No mag ever was writing something like "dangerous" or the like. And all were mentioning that a passenger at once cured all the nervousness.

BTW, I have also friends owning older Japan bikes, CBX, Bol d'Or, Kawa Z1000 etc. Have you ever talked to one of those guys? They can tell stories about weaving and wobbling. One is very proud that after lots of modifications he now can go highspeed on the Bahn with his CBX even at daytime between cars and lorries.

 

Those other two mentioned members (further above): it's again the same bullshitting like in most posts of them. Only "I heard..." or "I'm sure there was, because I have a phone number of this dentist..." and so on. If it was "I heard my sister is pregnant again and again the neighbours said she probably can't remember of whom" then it might be funny. Unfortunately they start different stories using these words.

If one writes that Guzzis were killing people and that Guzzi ignored it then he should have very good evidence for that and also he should be willing to share that evidence. The more when he implies that Guzzi did this before and so probably did the same again with the KR. I'd say this is more a thing for a good lawer if not even an state attorny. And to speak about the other bloke: in the end he will come up and say all was just fun and mocking and testing the forum members. Yes, and that Docc was his companion

 

Hubert

[Baldini]

......"Mine doesn't wobble!" Well, OK, maybe yours doesn't, and maybe you don't ride it very hard or haven't hit just the right bump yet while heeled over. ...

 

Like most times here - I don't see what the argument is - anything has limits, any bike will eventually misbehave given the right inputs. Saying a V11 (short or long neck) doesn't wobble/weave just means it hasn't been pushed hard enough in the right places. You can set suspension up good as you like - try hard enough & you'll inevitably come to the limits set by weight, distribution of that weight, & chassis flex.

 

KB

[raz]

So where is a 1100 Sporti (pre V11) placed in a similar comparison? Wheel base? Rake? Length of stuff?

I tried to look it up myself as I'm curious. But I more or less failed. The WHB only tells the wheelbase:

 

Wheelbase: 1475 mm [WHB]

Rake: 26° [unconfirmed, probably the carb Sport]

Trail: 90 mm [same unconfirmed source]

Fork length: 760 mm [WHB]

 

Rear wheel is 160/60 or /70. The V11 is 170 or 180, right?

[Guest ratchethack]

I tried to look it up myself as I'm curious. But I more or less failed. The WHB only tells the wheelbase:

 

Wheelbase: 1475 mm [WHB]

Rake: 26° [unconfirmed, probably the carb Sport]

Trail: 90 mm [same unconfirmed source]

Fork length: 760 mm [WHB]

 

Rear wheel is 160/60 or /70. The V11 is 170 or 180, right?

The OE rear wheel on the short frame Sports and RMs is 17 x 4.5". Mine was shipped from Mandello with a 170/60 rear tire, one size too large for the wheel. A replacement 160/60 tire has worked wonders on the 4.5" wheel for overcoming the OE vague and unpredictable cornering for many, myself included. The later LMs were shipped with a 5.5" rear wheel and 180 rears, also one size too large for the wheel, though some 180's seem to be a better fit than others. Downsizing to the 170 on the 5.5" wheel has likewise helped the handling of many, according to years of posts on this. OTOH, some on this Forum have actually fitted (and swear by ) 190's on the 5.5" rear, but then there are still others who swear by "long bikes" from the likes o' OCC with 300 rears. . .

[docc]

Like most times here - I don't see what the argument is - anything has limits, any bike will eventually misbehave given the right inputs. Saying a V11 (short or long neck) doesn't wobble/weave just means it hasn't been pushed hard enough in the right places. You can set suspension up good as you like - try hard enough & you'll inevitably come to the limits set by weight, distribution of that weight, & chassis flex.

 

KB

 

 

Agreed.

 

Just for clarification, I suppose I'm coming from a pretty novice background, as three of my Honda streetbikes required no fettling whatsoever. I did find that to cafe a 1975 Gold Wing would require significant attention, dollars and time to setup the suspension for sport riding.

 

The other spine frames I've ridden (1100 Sport, V11 Cafe Sport) both impressed me as long, stable and slower turning. I would think anyone throwing a leg over the Red Frame would feel the difference right away.

 

My observation regarding the Red Frame's 'difference' in feel is especially true of its setup as delivered, and as tested, back in 2000 These bikes are way undersprung. While the sag can be set on the rear Sachs, it was a nightmare to get to. The bikes were delivered with far too much sag, especially in the rear. The forks could be preloaded with spacers, but it ruined their rebound capability. I suspect the vast majority of riders probably never set their sag or even try.

 

I firmly believe a problem (as delivered) of equivalent magnitude was the Pirelli Dragon Corsa tires. They were soft, tire pressure on the low side, somewhat angular profile, and the rear was too wide for the rim. The combined softness of the suspension and tires, along with the awkward size match, I believe, made for the 90-100 mph weave. I discovered this typically while passing semis on the Interstate. Any use of the steering damper exacerbated this weave. I've never experienced any high amplitude 'wobble' on the Sport; only the weave.

 

Simply attending to tire fitment and setting the proper sags is not really all that difficult. Yet, the first 10,000 miles I put on the Sport, there was very little information available. This forum did not yet exist and the guys on Wildguzzi were less than charitable. So, it took quite some time and effort to sort. True, I did crash on a setup of too much fork spacer on too soft springs with too much tire pressure on too hard tires (rider error added for flavor and effect).

 

Compared to setting up a race bike for different tracks and conditions, I know the Sport is not that complicated. But, compared to other typical streetbikes, I have found it challenging to get right.

 

Now that I've got the right springs and preload up front with lighter oils and an understanding of centiStokes, the properly preloaded and damped Ohlins on back, Pirelli Stradas 120F/160R running 34/40 psi, 5mm drop on the triple clamps, the Stucchi flyscreen (which cleans the air over the front at speed), and a better sense of keeping rider wight biased on the front, the Sport does seem to ride quite well. Of course, there was the complication that my rebound fork internals were misassembled from the factory causing a 1/4 inch movement every time the fork compresseed or extended and the center Heim for the steering damper tried to fall out once. And, I can't be sure how much adding the frame center brace has contributed to a more stable wheelbase. Then there was the laser alignment of the swingarm. And the adjustability of the clip-on and levers which alter weight bias.

 

I certainly like the fact that Red Frames are not like the other Guzzis; maybe even that they do take an extra edge and some considerable knowledge and fettling to ride aggressively.

 

To say that the Red Frames are unstable, dangerous or even "twitchy" is certainly a stretch.

 

I do believe new owners Aprilia (in 2002) sought to address the complaints of the press in making changes to the chassis and measures to reduce the felt vibration in the handgrips, especially the left. I don't think they heard anything I had to say at the time and, thus, don't believe "customer feedback" drove any of their decisions. While I think the changes were good, and the '03/'04 bikes were probably the 'best' of the breed, I'm glad I have an early Red Frame with it's mystique and (perhaps) checkered past.

 

She is a magnificent ride on a misty cool morning along the creeks and over the ridgetops.

[Guest ratchethack]

A certain number of those things're extremely twitchy, no matter how they're set up.

My local Voodo Priestess told me (while chanting in Hatian, according to her translator) that the Great Horned Extremely Twitchy Demon enters Short Frame Sports through grates in storm drains. Once he gets up into the spine frame through the breather hose, he's mighty hard to get out -- but it can be done.

 

 

The nasty, Great Horned Extremely Twitchy Demon

 

Madame Gatore Grosse Bayou has some powerful ju-ju that will exorcise the Extremely Twitchy Demon, but you have to be willing to go to her house at midnight, stand before her altar naked, smear smelly goat entrails and chicken blood all over your head, chant up a magic spell, and have her spit rum in your face three times by the light of three successive full moons. Then the Great Horned Extremely Twitchy Demon comes out of your Spine frame and dives back down the nearest storm drain.

 

As long as you never ride near a storm drain, she says you'll never have the Extremely Twitchy problem.

 

So thats wot I do, and apparently lots of others do, too. . .

[jcbooghs]

I tried to look it up myself as I'm curious. But I more or less failed. The WHB only tells the wheelbase:

 

Wheelbase: 1475 mm [WHB]

Rake: 26° [unconfirmed, probably the carb Sport]

Trail: 90 mm [same unconfirmed source]

Fork length: 760 mm [WHB]

 

Rear wheel is 160/60 or /70. The V11 is 170 or 180, right?

 

The carbed Sport's rear wheel was 18" with a 160/60. From the Sport i there were 17" mounted. I remember the difference between the Sporti (160/70-17) and the Daytona RS (160/60-17). With the length of the rearshock, similar in all cases (280mm), the Daytona was less heigh at the rear which resulted in poorer driveability. When they swapped that rear 160/60 to a 160/70 the problem was gone.

The V11 is even lower than that Daytona RS with a rearshock length of 276mm. So I think the problem should be looked after there.

[raz]

Thanks. So if Guzzi had given numbers for Carbed Sport, Daytona RS and Sporti, they would all have different rake and trail despite the same frame, just because of the wheels and tires? No wait, the Daytona RS had 10 mm raised forks so maybe that was the same rake as Sporti, only lower ground clearance. And perhaps the carbed Sport's fork was longer?

[Greg Field]

If one writes that Guzzis were killing people and that Guzzi ignored it then he should have very good evidence for that and also he should be willing to share that evidence. The more when he implies that Guzzi did this before and so probably did the same again with the KR. I'd say this is more a thing for a good lawer if not even an state attorny. And to speak about the other bloke: in the end he will come up and say all was just fun and mocking and testing the forum members. Yes, and that Docc was his companion

 

Hubert

 

 

I did write that a test rider was killed on an Eldorado, first in my book. I wrote this after talking to the Guzzi engineer who came to the US, set up the bike, and then crashed it. It was he who told me that a Guzzi test rider was later killed on one of the wobbling police bikes. Ivar DeGier confirmed that the test rider was killed. So did Todero. I also talked with the service manager at ZDS Motors, the US West Coas Guzzi distributor, and he was the guy who was riding aloong on another bike behind the Guzzi engineer when the bike went into a wobble and threw the engineer.

 

If you can disprove any of this, I'm waiting to hear the sources you have that are better than eye-witnesses and the actual guy who was thrown.

[luhbo]

No no, no need to disprove it as long as you are sure about your sources. Amazing btw. to what people you've been talking in your life. Didn't think you're of such age.

Just a remark: those bikes came to Germany as well. They did a funny highway test with them. Munich - Hamburg - Munich - (Hamburg). No wobble stories. Of course those bikes were driven on a private basis, not by Police authorities in competiton against BMW. Maybe this made them "track" a little better. We know how capricious those Italian beauties can be.

 

What year was it when they delivered them to the US and when did those accidents happen? Not that we're talking of different bikes.

 

Hubert

[Baldini]

... The later LMs were shipped with a 5.5" rear wheel and 180 rears, also one size too large for the wheel...

 

180 is not wrong tyre for 5.5" rim. Correct fitment to 5.5" rim is 180 or 170. Refer to manufacturer recommendations.

 

There is less tyre choice in 170 than 180 size. So, though I have used 170's (& prefer steering on narrower tyre) I now run 180 Michelin Pilot Power 2CT & handling is comparable to a 170 from some other brands. I believe this is down to tyre profile.

 

I think that factory change from 18" to 17" rear wheel was driven by fashion & tyre choice rather than any functional advantage. I suspect I would prefer handling on a larger diameter & a narrower rim but I don't know how varying diameter front/back would affect turn in & stability.

 

Some of the feel of a quicker turn in on the early V11's will be down to the narrower rear rim.

 

Given the rear weight bias of the spine frame Guzzis - any reduction in rear ride ht will just exacerbate the potential handling issues.

 

My Tonti, on 100f 110r x 18's has lovely linear progression on turn in - down, I believe, to the very closely matched tyre widths. Obviously there are other considerations, but, in principle, it seems to me that the closer the rear width matches the front, the nicer the steering will be.

 

KB

[Greg Field]

No no, no need to disprove it as long as you are sure about your sources. Amazing btw. to what people you've been talking in your life. Didn't think you're of such age.

Just a remark: those bikes came to Germany as well. They did a funny highway test with them. Munich - Hamburg - Munich - (Hamburg). No wobble stories. Of course those bikes were driven on a private basis, not by Police authorities in competiton against BMW. Maybe this made them "track" a little better. We know how capricious those Italian beauties can be.

 

What year was it when they delivered them to the US and when did those accidents happen? Not that we're talking of different bikes.

 

Hubert

 

THe first of the Guzzi police bikes for the US were most likely in 1969 (I never found documents saying exactly when). Accidents happened in several different years. Not every bike wobbled. Only some of them, which is the point I brought up in the beginning.

 

Like most of you here, Guzzi and the US importer (Berliner) at first said, "Well, they must not've been set up properly."

 

Berliner spent the money to ship the wobblers back to ZDS Motors in California, where they had their best mechanic set them up. Most of those that wobbled before still wobbled after this guy had done everything to set them up properly. He reported that Guzzi should buy back and scrap these bikes. Guzzi said, "No, they're still not set up properly," and sent in an engineer to do this work at ZDS. He changed steering head and swingarm bearings, measured frames for straightness, and did everything he though might help. Then he turned to the ZDS mechanic who had already done these things and found that they wobbled anyway and told him to take one of them for a test ride. The ZDS guy said words to the effect, "Hell, no. I did everything you have just done, and it didn't help. I don't want to get killed on one of those things." So, the Guzzi engineer took one of them out, and the ZDS guy followed on a non-wobbler, knowing what would happen. SUre enough, the wobbler went into a wobble and the Guzzi engineer was seriously injured in the crash.

[luhbo]

Where these bikes in "Police Dress" already? With lights and horn and so?

 

I understand wobbling to be caused by matching or nonmatching (as you like to see it) resonance frequencies of front and rear part of the bike. Front means wheel, fender, fork, everything beeing part of the steering, rear is the rest of the bike.

Then what can be so different from one bike to the next, from the same type, the same line, roughly the same date, same tires etc., that one easily runs into the critical area of resonance and the other one doesn't - is in fact far away from it? The more as both bikes are set up identically.

I personally find it very hard to believe, but be it as it is.

 

Hubert