Red (short) Frame vs. Black (long) Frame

[Rox Lemans]

18 hours ago, docc said:

The "triangular brace" (between the bottom of the SpineFrame and the top junction of the engine/gearbox) that went missing on the V11 is only fittable to the early Sports 1999-2001, but that is not the LongFrame "gearbox bracing." This is two tubes extending from the lowest tip of the frame side plates (from the lower subframe) forward to the back of the engine case. This cannot be added to the early Sports as there is no boss to attach the brace tubes to the engine. Look for the tube in this Scura image just above the exhaust:

I found this out the hard way when I bought an old Corbin seat and it wouldn't fit... So anyone who has a short frame and wants a Corbin for a killer price PM me..

[Lucky Phil]

4 hours ago, Scud said:

Hey Phil - no worries about bubble bursting, especially if you are providing evidence.

It's clear that the internal-pump tank is longer, which I did not know.

My experience was in swapping a Greenie tank with a Champagne LeMans tank. This was red-frame to black frame, but both tanks had petcocks and external pressure regulators, supplied by an external fuel pump. 

So... I still believe that the external-pump tanks were the same size through 2002 (same as Footgoose said above). Then they were different starting in 2003 with the internal pumps. (With the customary footnote for the bikes sold as 2003 models, which were more like the 2002 models). 

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    

[Scud]

Yeah Phil - My 2002 Scura has the more substantial subframe elements as you described. Same with the 2002 LeMans I had. They are interchangeable with the 2003 and 2004 models.

Definitely seems to be a transition period - and explains why the 2003 LeMans had internal fuel pumps, while the 2003 Sport models had the carryover external pumps and smaller tanks.

[gstallons]

Transition period ? That's funny . M/G is a transition period .

[Lucky Phil]

5 hours ago, Scud said:

Yeah Phil - My 2002 Scura has the more substantial subframe elements as you described. Same with the 2002 LeMans I had. They are interchangeable with the 2003 and 2004 models.

Definitely seems to be a transition period - and explains why the 2003 LeMans had internal fuel pumps, while the 2003 Sport models had the carryover external pumps and smaller tanks.

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

Ciao

[docc]

14 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

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

Ciao

For just the subframes? Seems this is the right thread for that topic.

[Lucky Phil]

3 hours ago, docc said:

For just the subframes? Seems this is the right thread for that topic.

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

[al_roethlisberger]

On 2/29/2020 at 5:47 PM, footgoose said:

At the risk of thread drift, and regarding tank sizes, are we talking about 2 different frames and 2 different tanks? I'm fairly certain 99 thru (early) 03 external pump tanks were all the same and were oem on red And black frames. The internal pump tank being on the (later) 03 -05. The internal and external pump tanks are different lengths, though I only eyeballed it. 20mm sounds correct as I recall having laid them side by side, and the extra length was forward of the neck cutout. I no longer have the 'internal" tank to check.

Thinking purely as a bean counter, MG had to recast the new tank for the inside pump anyway, possibly adding a bit of capacity to the front to compensate for the pump's space. Then why would they bother to change the frame?

 

sorry posted same time as Phil

 

I'm sure I have a thread on here somewhere about the external pump and internal pump tank capacity and dimensional differences when I was chasing the vapor lock issues and finally just went out and bought a used 2003 internal pump tank and retrofitted it to my 2002.   

Although I obviously had to modify the fuel lines and electrical connections, which was trivial, the tank itself dropped right on with no modifications.  So although I doubt the 2003+ tanks will fit a short frame bike, the 2003 tank will fit a long frame 2002 bike with no problem.

What I also noted back then, even before the swap, was that the 2002 tank looked a bit too short at the nose on the bike to me, especially when looking at earlier bikes.  This turned out to be because the long frame extension apparently was done at the head tube, and created a larger gap between the nose of the tank and head tube than was present on the short frame bikes.  When I installed the longer 2003 tank, that unsightly gap between the nose of the 2002 tank and head tube closed up and looked better, more like the short frame bikes.

 

[Lucky Phil]

24 minutes ago, al_roethlisberger said:

 

I'm sure I have a thread on here somewhere about the external pump and internal pump tank capacity and dimensional differences when I was chasing the vapor lock issues and finally just went out and bought a used 2003 internal pump tank and retrofitted it to my 2002.   

Although I obviously had to modify the fuel lines and electrical connections, which was trivial, the tank itself dropped right on with no modifications.  So although I doubt the 2003+ tanks will fit a short frame bike, the 2003 tank will fit a long frame 2002 bike with no problem.

What I also noted back then, even before the swap, was that the 2002 tank looked a bit too short at the nose on the bike to me, especially when looking at earlier bikes.  This turned out to be because the long frame extension apparently was done at the head tube, and created a larger gap between the nose of the tank and head tube than was present on the short frame bikes.  When I installed the longer 2003 tank, that unsightly gap between the nose of the 2002 tank and head tube closed up and looked better, more like the short frame bikes.

 

Your preaching to the converted here. I think this has been done to death and answered here and in previous threads.

Ciao 

[docc]

7 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Your preaching to the converted here. I think this has been done to death and answered here and in previous threads.

Ciao 

Yet, I never really thought about short tanks on the first long frames of 2002. This must be true of Scura and Tenni, as well.

[Lucky Phil]

3 minutes ago, docc said:

Yet, I never really thought about short tanks on the first long frames of 2002. This must be true of Scura and Tenni, as well.

My brains hurting now

Ciao

[docc]

To set brains hurting even more . . .

Does the LongFrame, and its front subframe suspending the front of the engine, change the angle of the driveline, fore to aft? Said differently, is the LongFrame engine/gearbox stressed member angled differently from the earlier V11?

Was the "polar moment of inertia" changed?

[Lucky Phil]

1 hour ago, docc said:

To set brains hurting even more . . .

Does the LongFrame, and its front subframe suspending the front of the engine, change the angle of the driveline, fore to aft? Said differently, is the LongFrame engine/gearbox stressed member angled differently from the earlier V11?

Was the "polar moment of inertia" changed?

No docc the additional frame length is fwd of the front subframe mounts.

Ciao

[docc]

10 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

No docc the additional frame length is fwd of the front subframe mounts.

Ciao

So, the the dimensions of the three mounting points of the front subframe are identical to the earlier subframes?

[Lucky Phil]

5 hours ago, docc said:

So, the the dimensions of the three mounting points of the front subframe are identical to the earlier subframes?

Yep

Ciao