Andreani upgrades for V11 OEM Marzocchi forks

[LaGrasta]

 From all of these variations, inconsistencies, and differences; I actually gleaned something just now (thx @docc). I'm going to add a 1" PVC spacer, to help with

preload. I believe this is all I'm missing to make this suspension acceptable. It still won't be great, but acceptable. Since I can add the spacers, cheap and easy, it seems like the thing to do. Plus, my only other alternative is to invest in a set of Traxxion Dynamics or Matris cartridges, and that I cannot come to terms with. 

I figure 1 inch is a good place to start.  Advice? Do I need to cut the spring an even amount of the spacer? This is what I normally do. 

[docc]

1 minute ago, LaGrasta said:

 From all of these variations, inconsistencies, and differences; I actually gleaned something just now (thx @docc). I'm going to add a 1" PVC spacer, to help with

preload. I believe this is all I'm missing to make this suspension acceptable. It still won't be great, but acceptable. Since I can add the spacers, cheap and easy, it seems like the thing to do. Plus, my only other alternative is to invest in a set of Traxxion Dynamics or Matris cartridges, and that I cannot come to terms with. 

I figure 1 inch is a good place to start.  Advice? Do I need to cut the spring an even amount of the spacer? This is what I normally do. 

Guzzimoto has a good method to set your sags and determine if the springs are too soft. If that is the case, correct springs make a huge improvement and are not very expensive.

Otherwise, you can calculate how much additional preload is needed with your existing springs (don't cut them).

[GuzziMoto]

37 minutes ago, LaGrasta said:

 From all of these variations, inconsistencies, and differences; I actually gleaned something just now (thx @docc). I'm going to add a 1" PVC spacer, to help with

preload. I believe this is all I'm missing to make this suspension acceptable. It still won't be great, but acceptable. Since I can add the spacers, cheap and easy, it seems like the thing to do. Plus, my only other alternative is to invest in a set of Traxxion Dynamics or Matris cartridges, and that I cannot come to terms with. 

I figure 1 inch is a good place to start.  Advice? Do I need to cut the spring an even amount of the spacer? This is what I normally do. 

There are two different things you can be doing, one is adding preload, which doesn't make the spring stiffer and is what you referred to. But what you describe doing is cutting the springs to make them stiffer and then replacing the length of spring you cut out to keep the preload the same. That does make the spring stiffer. That is something we would do in the old days when we could not afford to buy the correct springs, or in some cases where the correct springs were not available. I really don't recommend doing that, but technically it can work. If you are going to do that I would probably do it 1 inch or less at a time. If you measure the length of the spring and then cut out, say, 5% of the total length of the spring and replace it with a spacer the length of the spring you cut out that should make the spring roughly 5% stiffer. The big drawback to cutting springs to make them stiffer is you loose the proper end to the spring that allows the end to rotate smoothly on the surface it rides on. That can be even more of an issue if the surface it is riding on is a PVC spacer. It may not slide well on that. I always thought the best way to do that would be to leave the ends and cut out a section of the spring in the middle of the spring and replace it with the matching spacer. But I never actually tried that. Doing it that way would preserve the proper ends on the spring. But it means cutting the spring twice instead of once. Before I ever got to try it I started making enough money for a living that I could buy the proper springs so I never needed to try the middle cut idea.

But springs should be available for the V11 at a reasonable cost. I would go that route over cutting your springs to make them stiffer. Also, have you properly measured your sag and determined how much you have? That would be step 1. Just making your springs stiffer by cutting them without first knowing how much sag you have would be a shot in the dark. Springs are a lot cheaper then a full replacement cartridge. But knowing that you need new springs and whether they need to be softer or stiffer then what you have now would be a matter of measuring your current sag first. Instructions on how to measure sag are on here if you need.

Also, it sounds like you have the one version of forks that Andreani actually makes replacement cartridge's for. Black 40mm forks with compression on one leg and rebound on the other, if I understood you correctly.

[LaGrasta]

Great explanation, thank you. After reading this, I believe I need only add a 1 inch spacer, thus affecting preload.

I did set my sag' strangely, it seemed my shock spring was too light. I adjusted it all the way out. Being only 165lbs, I would expect OEM springs to cover my weight range. Maybe it was swapped out by PO, but it doesn't appear to be.

My wife is traveling with the daughter this weekend, visiting SJSU, so I'll have time to add my PVC. We'll see how it reacts…

[GuzziMoto]

13 minutes ago, LaGrasta said:

Great explanation, thank you. After reading this, I believe I need only add a 1 inch spacer, thus affecting preload.

I did set my sag' strangely, it seemed my shock spring was too light. I adjusted it all the way out. Being only 165lbs, I would expect OEM springs to cover my weight range. Maybe it was swapped out by PO, but it doesn't appear to be.

My wife is traveling with the daughter this weekend, visiting SJSU, so I'll have time to add my PVC. We'll see how it reacts…

Adding 1" of preload to the front forks is a massive change to preload, and would reduce sag by about an inch. That would probably be too much. Standard sag with the rider on the bike for a V11 Sport is around an inch to an inch and a half. So reducing sag by an inch is probably too big a change. Usually you add preload in much smaller amounts. If you wish to reduce sag by 1/4" you only need to add 1/4" of preload. If you want to reduce sag by 1/2" you would add 1/2" of preload. It should be a 1 to 1 ratio between preload and sag.

As mentioned elsewhere on here, if you measure your bikes sag with you on it and measure how much it sags just under its own weight (both measured based on fully extended suspension) and compare the two values that should tell you both if your preload is right but also once preload is right it tells you whether your springs are too soft, too stiff, or just right. Once preload is to where you have around 25 - 30 percent sag with you on the bike you should have around 10 percent sag just from the weight of the bike. There is some wiggle room there for rider preference, I prefer less sag when I am on the bike, some prefer more for a softer ride. The spring rates don't change because of your sag, but the spring rates required to get sag at 25 percent vs 30 percent make the difference. But measure your sag both just the weight of the bike and with you on the bike and compare. What preload affects is ride height when you are riding down the road. It does not change spring rate, it does not make the springs stiffer or softer. It is mainly about getting the suspension in the correct operating range for proper suspension motion.

As mentioned, if you do have the one version of forks that Andreani make a cartridge for that might be what you want to go with if you aren't happy with stock.

[Lucky Phil]

11 hours ago, audiomick said:

Dunno, mate. The VIN is ZGUKTA0102M111xxx, if that tells you anything.

Here you go. The left one is the same as the right-hand one visible in the picture:

Maybe your bike has had a front end swap Mick from a late model Sport naked or Ballabio? as it appears to have the mount holes in the top triple clamp for the high, traditional bar mounts? Either that or the PO has had a traditional bar kit on it in the past.

The later Sport Naked or Ballabio front end swap would account for the larger 43mm dia late forks as well. 

Interestingly I can not find an image of a 2002 Le Mans with the non chin piece tank either. Maybe your bike was made in 2002 but is a 2003 model. Not sure. The date of manufacture and the year model are a bit mirky in Europe V America with the next year model production started usually after the European Summer holiday shutdown in August

 

 

 

Phil

[LaGrasta]

A bit of confusion somehow. My bike does not have the bar holes in the triple tree, and it does have a chin pad.

[gstallons]

I measured a fork tube similar to yours and the lower portion (chrome lower) of the fork tube measures 43ish mm 

The forks on my red frame and black frame measure 40ish mm.  

You will soon realize there are no absolutes when it comes to these bikes, I found this out a long time ago when I was resealing and rebushing the forks on my 2003ish V11. Got all my stuff from Joe Eish and got everything apart to find out nothing worked. He graciously took all the wrong parts back and sent me the correct stuff.  S.N.s date of production and models mean nothing here. 

 With that being said , someone may have crafted a new (different)front end on this bike , who knows?

[docc]

19 hours ago, Lucky Phil said:

Maybe your bike has had a front end swap Mick from a late model Sport naked or Ballabio? as it appears to have the mount holes in the top triple clamp for the high, traditional bar mounts? Either that or the PO has had a traditional bar kit on it in the past.

The later Sport Naked or Ballabio front end swap would account for the larger 43mm dia late forks as well. 

Interestingly I can not find an image of a 2002 Le Mans with the non chin piece tank either. Maybe your bike was made in 2002 but is a 2003 model. Not sure. The date of manufacture and the year model are a bit mirky in Europe V America with the next year model production started usually after the European Summer holiday shutdown in August

 

 

 

Phil

 

54 minutes ago, LaGrasta said:

A bit of confusion somehow. My bike does not have the bar holes in the triple tree, and it does have a chin pad.

Lucky Phil was replying to Audiomick. Mick actually created a separate topic to help with the confusion:

 

34 minutes ago, gstallons said:

I measured a fork tube similar to yours and the lower portion (chrome lower) of the fork tube measures 43ish mm 

The forks on my red frame and black frame measure 40ish mm.  

You will soon realize there are no absolutes when it comes to these bikes, I found this out a long time ago when I was resealing and rebushing the forks on my 2003ish V11. Got all my stuff from Joe Eish and got everything apart to find out nothing worked. He graciously took all the wrong parts back and sent me the correct stuff.  S.N.s date of production and models mean nothing here. 

 With that being said , someone may have crafted a new (different)front end on this bike , who knows?

Knowing if your 2003 V11 is actually a 2002 "Carryover" will direct your parts searches to the 2002 Parts Catalog and save much grief:

 

[LaGrasta]

yup, this is mine: titled as 2003, with a 2002 "Long black Frame" with "Short Tank" (chin pad/external fuel pump/filter), white gauges, crinkle engine paint.

[Lucky Phil]

4 hours ago, docc said:

 

Lucky Phil was replying to Audiomick. Mick actually created a separate topic to help with the confusion:

 

Knowing if your 2003 V11 is actually a 2002 "Carryover" will direct your parts searches to the 2002 Parts Catalog and save much grief:

 

I thought the "carry over" thing for the 2002 models was an American thing only? A way they got rid of older unsold 2002 bikes in the US as re labelled 2003. Didn't think it applied to European bikes?

 

Phil 

[docc]

1 hour ago, Lucky Phil said:

I thought the "carry over" thing for the 2002 models was an American thing only? A way they got rid of older unsold 2002 bikes in the US as re labelled 2003. Didn't think it applied to European bikes?

 

Phil 

2003 Carryover Sports have been reported from the UK (stewgnu and Guzzimax) and New Zealand (02V11), so not just a US thing.

There were some apparent US marketing attempts with the 2001 Sport that gave us the "TT" and the "CF" that mixed the color palette of the otherwise monochromatic early Sport.

Audiomick's 2002 LeMans with various 2003 features seems an anomaly . . .

[audiomick]

5 hours ago, docc said:

Mick actually created a separate topic to help with the confusion:

I find there is much to be said for focussing on the things in life at which one excels.

[docc]

5 minutes ago, audiomick said:

I find there is much to be said for focussing on the things in life at which one excels.

Haha, well "helping with the confusion" wasn't how I should have put that... 

[GuzziMoto]

On 2/17/2024 at 4:33 PM, Lucky Phil said:

I thought the "carry over" thing for the 2002 models was an American thing only? A way they got rid of older unsold 2002 bikes in the US as re labelled 2003. Didn't think it applied to European bikes?

 

Phil 

I find the year of a motorcycle is more fluid in Europe then it is here in the US. In the US a bike that is a 2002 model is nearly always sold as a 2002 model, even if it is not sold until 2003, or even 2004 or 2005. It is titled when it is sold, but here a bike is always titled as the year it was built for. I am no expert, but it seems in much of Europe a 2002 bike can be titled as a 2003 if that is when it is sold. I often have bought leftover models, sometimes you can get a better deal on them.

That said, I do think that Guzzi has always been fluid about the way it transitions new changes into the line. They seem to use the parts they have on hand to build the bikes. If the parts on hand change, they use the new parts. Look at the way roller tappets became the tappet for a CARC motor. It just quietly happened part way through a model year. But most of the changes are much more subtle and minor. They seem to simply run out of a part and when the order new ones the new parts may not be the same.