BREAK IN

[Lex]

The charcoal canisters have nothing to do with vapor lock and I doubt they have anything to do with overflow problems. Every bike on US roads (and most of the rest of the world) has the same systems (Guzzi's part are built by Nippon Denso, just like pretty much everybody else's) and other bikes do not have these problems.

 

Vapor lock should have been eliminated when the fuel pump was moved inside the tank. As far as overflow problem I'm not familiar with them but since the normal solution for running without the canisters is to run an open hose to the bottom of the bike I'd have trouble calling dumping extremely combustible fumes next to your hot pipes an improvement.

 

All the canisters do (post 2001 when they took up the tool kit space) is cut the amount your bike contributes to dirty air (specifically unburned hydrocarbons) and add a few pounds. Most of us could take off more weight by skipping the second (or third) helping at our meals. Taking off the charcoal canisters is pretty much the same thing as stopping for lunch and throwing your trash on the ground, the only difference is the pollution from the canisters is invisible. One bike doesn't make that much pollution, one piece of trash isn't a problem but most of us live in areas with hundreds of thousands or even millions of people and our "trash" accumulates.

 

Sorry, but I'm getting tired of hearing the "dump the canisters" advice repeated with no dissenting opinions. I spent a fair amount of time and work relocating the canisters on my 2001 V11 from the tool kit area. My bike runs very well and has no problems with vapor lock or fuelover flow even in temperatures over 100 F.

 

Lex

[dlaing]

Also, don't completely trust your dealer.

Check your oil levels.

Check your tire pressure.

Tighten EVERY bolt that you can get to.

If you have the time, have them quickly check the throttle balance, because if they are off, and they are off from the factory, going at steady speed will break the cylinders in unevenly.

The problem with driving within the 60-70mph range is that you will almost always be at the same RPM and in top gear.

Try not to lug the engine, so when you approach a hill try to get a running start, and then as you are climbing it, gradually slow down like you were a heavy truck and drop into 4th or 5th gear.

Try to vary your RPMs as much as you can without getting run over for going too slowly for the traffic condition.

As much as you do not want to lug it, you should also vary the throttle load.

Stop and take many lunch breaks to get the engine to go through heat cycle changes.

I am not sure how important it is to let it fully cool, probably not too important.

After reading Ken at Evoluzione's dyno break in results, it probably won't hurt the engine to occasionally rev it above 5000 RPM with near full throttle. But that goes against the conventional thinking, so it is your choice, and don't let the warranty guys know that you broke it in that way.

The next new bike that I get, I am going to drive as hard as I can.

My current bike, I broke in slowly, but the first 400 miles were highway miles where I varied the speed mostly from 40 to 65mph. I tried as much as I could to stay off the interstates and I took two full days to ride the 400 miles with many breaks.

As a result, I have had little oil consumption, but I think my bike develops less power than it would have if I had followed Ken's advice.

I know someone with a Jackal who broke his in by riding his normal quick pace with no regard for RPM, and he gets excellent HP numbers on the dyno. I think he is close to 100,000miles now on the original valves, rings, etc.

So the fast break in can work, but I would be concerned that the bike is properly tuned before doing a fast break in.

So once again,

Check your oil levels.

Check your tire pressure.

Tighten EVERY bolt that you can get to.

And balance the throttle bodies.

Just an opinion, I have only broken in four engines in my life. The first was a short lived V65SP whose first 100 miles were spent between 50 and 55 mph.

I think that may have effected the short life.

So at the least try to vary your speed as much as you safely can.

[cgalardi]

Thanks a lot for all the replys guys!

 

I just found out I am not closing on the deal until Monday evening, so I will get to give my '03 Stone Metal one final ride this weekend before I trade her in. At ~14,000 miles, I know she's well beyond the break-in period.

 

Once again, thank you and I look forward to being a regular reader and occasional contributor!

 

chris in omaha

[Guest russ]

The charcoal canisters have nothing to do with vapor lock

Lex, you are technically correct as it is not the traditional vapor lock. What happens is that the vent valve on the tank when connected to the cannister causes a vaccuum/suction blockage which draws fuel into the cannister. This usually occurs if you fill the tank too high. The tank tends to collapse inwards, damaging the paint. I know because this happened on my bike.

 

Removal of the cannister and proper venting of the tank cured it. The cannister is a CA only requirement, although the epa would not "allow" you to remove it in other states. You may be right that it might put out slightly more emissions but it still meets current standards in 49 States.

 

Your rant about comparing pollution is unfounded as if you keep the bike tuned properly, you pollute much less than the SUV's that pollute our highways with a single occupant; or maybe you haven't been looking at the drivers around you lately.

 

Also, good advice not to trust your dealer, until he/she earns it.

[Lex]

Your rant about comparing pollution is unfounded as if you keep the bike tuned properly, you pollute much less than the SUV's that pollute our highways with a single occupant; or maybe you haven't been looking at the drivers around you lately.

 

Russ,

 

If you are talking about the giant SUVs (and trucks) that are exempt from the smog regulation you are absolutely correct. The fact that these vehicles are exempt from the emissions standards is a travesty. However, every other car and light truck only produces a small fraction of what a motorcycle, even one meeting the California standards, produces. The car/ light truck standards are several times tighter than the motorcycle standards. Per mile motorcycles pollute much more than cars. Taking off the charcoal canisters just increases an already poor situation.

 

I put my canisters back on when I noticed that I could smell gas in my garage after removing them. The smell was very faint (remember, California gas stinks even more than normal gas because of the f%^&ing MTBE in it) but I noticed it on several occasions. Multiply that by the number of modified bikes and cars in my area and it is a significant source of pollution. I watched the air in the two areas where I have lived go from pretty clean to scary over the last forty years. I can report a noticeable improvement to my health from getting away from the smog. This is even more true of kids, no one can show direct cause-effect relationship but the huge increases in allergies and asthma is children is most likely caused by the crap in the air they breath. I'm more than will to carry 2 or 3 extra pounds on my bike to slow (at least) that happening to the beautiful, clean air where I live now. I love riding my bikes more than almost any other activity, I can't eliminate the pollution this causes but I try to minimizes it.

 

On the technical side, I would be very surprised if the canisters caused your "tank suck" (what you are calling vapor lock). You have to grossly over fill the tank or fill the tank to the very top then park the bike to put enough gas into the canister to cause that problem. From you past posts I'm pretty sure you are too bright to do that. I'd say it is much more likely your were a victim of the truly crappy tip over valve (TOV) that Moto Guzzi put on our bikes. The TOV is generally removed or fixed to the frame when the canisters are removed fixing this very serious problem. I've also had tank suck, I had it when I had the canisters removed. In fact, my TOV was still causing the problem with the tank removed from the bike! I was pretty close to freaking out when I pulled the vent hose/ TOV and my tank grew before my eyes. I have seen no evidence of tank suck since I affixed the TOV to my frame.

 

In short, if you are talking about removing/ fixing/ replacing the tip-over-valve, I 100% with you. OTOH, if you are talking about removing the canisters we'll just have to disagree.

 

Cheers,

 

Lex

[dlaing]

Alright Lex!

Glad to hear someone care about the environment.

Being a California hypocrite, with a 2000 model, I want to know how you relocated the cannisters.

I was thinking of creating side panels ala V7Sport to hide the ECU, PCIII, winker relay, and cannisters, but I'd like to hear your solution.

I'll bet there is wasted space in the lower frame that could hold a cannister.

And if anyone has photos of the Tip-Over-Valve properly positioned, that would be great to see.

[Lex]

I was thinking of creating side panels ala V7Sport to hide the ECU, PCIII, winker relay, and cannisters, but I'd like to hear your solution.

I'll bet there is wasted space in the lower frame that could hold a cannister

 

Dlaing, I'm still a hypocrite; I'm a gasoline addict and I can't help myself. Last week I drove over 250 miles to participate in the "eco friendly" activity of SCUBA diving and my bikes all have this handling problem that leads me to take long, twisty roads when I could use much less gas by staying on the freeway.

 

Seriously, I just made a U shaped bracket that fits inside the mount for the mid-pipe. I then glued some old push bike inner-tube to the bracket to give a little vibration protection, used two hose clamps to attach one canister to the bracket and bought some hose at the local auto parts store to "plumb" the canister into the bike. I will swap the other canister in as I get miles on the bike, I would guess the charcoal only has a limited ability to absorb gas fumes. Note that the hoses run very close to the pipes, I did a bit of thinking to route then as far from the pipes as I could, so far no sighs of heat related problems. Note in the semi-helpful picture below you can see the cable tie I used to secure the vent hose wasn't so lucky. After I did this I found the later bikes have a differently shaped (fits the space much better) canister located in the same place, it may be this is the best place to put it/ them.

 

Al has a good write up on the TOV in his FAQ section. I don't think there is a picture but I think he did what I did and tied the valve to the back end of the sub-frame that forms the front engine mount with cable ties. I think what happens is that the valve gets tilted when you put the tank on, if it tilts to the right (all right/ left statements from the rider's POV), no problem. If it tilts to the left that puts it at a pretty large angle when the bike is on the side-stand so the valve closes. This crappy valve will then stay closed so as you use fuel you get the infamous tank-suck and if you are having a really bad day you get enough to damage the paint like poor Russ and few others. Once the valve is tied to the frame it seems (so far, cross your fingers, toes, etc.) to put a band-aid over the problem. Note I needed a longer piece of hose to connect the tank with the TOV after I tied the TOV to the frame.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Lex

[dlaing]

Thanks Lex!

[al_roethlisberger]

 

....[snip]

 

Al has a good write up on the TOV in his FAQ section. I don't think there is a picture but I think he did what I did and tied the valve to the back end of the sub-frame that forms the front engine mount with cable ties. I think what happens is that the valve gets tilted when you put the tank on, if it tilts to the right (all right/ left statements from the rider's POV), no problem. If it tilts to the left that puts it at a pretty large angle when the bike is on the side-stand so the valve closes. This crappy valve will then stay closed so as you use fuel you get the infamous tank-suck and if you are having a really bad day you get enough to damage the paint like poor Russ and few others. Once the valve is tied to the frame it seems (so far, cross your fingers, toes, etc.) to put a band-aid over the problem. Note I needed a longer piece of hose to connect the tank with the TOV after I tied the TOV to the frame.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Lex

 

Thanks

 

...and yes, it is simply "lashed" to the rear vertical leg of the triangular front engine mount. No problemo

 

al

[Guest carlomoto]

I've always been told, regardless of the engine, to treat it gently during the first 1,000 miles, then drive the hec out of it.

 

I'm a bit of a speed demon on the highway, routinely running the RPMs in the 5,500 - 6,000 range. The engine seems to be very happy up there.

 

I'll probably sing a different song when I bust a gasket or something catastrophic.

 

I've got 6,000 miles on my '03 V11 Sport . . . so far so good.

[Dirtybill]

I'm sorry but I have a very hard time with the Mototune misinformation.

 

I to, come from the automotive trade where I worked my way thru the apprenticeship program.

 

Mototune's experience is largely with race engines. Do we care about engine longetivity in race engines? Not really. So fine, your ridden the crap out of during break in bike may have 5 more hp, but for how long?

 

He also avoids mentioning anything about other engine parts other than pistons and rings. So I guess that means I can hammer the hell out of new valve springs, valves, oil pump? What about the gear box in bikes that combine the engine oil with the transmission?

 

I agree with Buck. I've always used the mildly agressive break in procedure with and oil change before the recommended first service and another oil change before the 2nd service. Using this same method, I've seen bikes like my RC51 and a friend's Honda 954 gain up to 9hp by the time it reaches the 10,000 mile mark.

 

And we are all confident that our bikes' engines will be fine for thousands of miles where Mr Mototune's will probably need an overhaul before that.

 

Why do companies like Guzzi and Triumph immediately rev up new bikes? Because it forces oil at high pressure to immediately lubricate the internals. Remember, these new engines are assembled using oil on all the parts so it has a protective coating there. Triumph also uses "break in oil" which as far as I can tell and have been told is just dino oil.

[Guest jeremy]

I have built many engines and I have allways told the people I built them for that it didn't really matter how they broke them in, its just if something for some unforseen reason decides to "let go" you will do much less damage if your taking it easy. The One thing I do tell them is don't start them up and listen to them and then shut them off, warm them up and then use them untill everything is completely up to operating temp, short trips will kill them, get it hot so everything settles and seats at full temp and you won't have any problems. I have 24,000 miles on my centauro in a little over 2 years and I ran it to redline the first time I rode it and everything is perfect. just my 2 cents

 

[Guest RFusi]

My '03 Sport finally showed up on Tuesday, shipped to Mississippi from Santa Ana,Calif. Allied van lines....Not a scratch. Late a few days though.

 

Wouldn't Idle hot or cold when it got here. Adjusted it. Idles fine now.

 

Break in: Kept below 5,000 for 100 miles. Below 6,000 for the next 100 miles. It is my opinion it's broken in by 200 miles. What do I base that on? It's the way I was taught back in the early 70's and it's the way I've always done it. Not very scientific I know, but it has worked. Never owned an oil burner that I broke in.

 

Riding impression: It has smooth power, I believe equal to my '95 Ducati 900ss. Honestly, that ain't saying much I am older and don't need the fastest Superbike made, although I once did.

 

It also corners equally as well as the Duc. This was somewhat a suprise. It feels wonderfull. I haven't reached the edge of the tires yet!!! It feels very light. It wants to turn.

 

Suspension..........Well suks. I am going to work on it this week. This thing is super harsh over small to med. ledge type bumps.

 

Comfort.......I had only sat on one before I bought one. There are no dealers near me. It's more comfortabl;e than I had hoped. Bars still need to be up 1 and back 1. My opinion.

 

I get more looks on this thing than any other bike I have ever owned. It's the "red" (burgundy). I am so far happy with the bike.

 

I love it. It's not perfect, thats why we need more than one. I am going to start working on that real soon.

 

Best regards,

 

Randy

[Guest Marcel]

Dlaing, I'm still a hypocrite; I'm a gasoline addict and I can't help myself. Last week I drove over 250 miles to participate in the "eco friendly" activity of SCUBA diving and my bikes all have this handling problem that leads me to take long, twisty roads when I could use much less gas by staying on the freeway.   

 

most of us will have that very same ailment

 

I'm an avid supporter of the Dutch Birdlife international, WWF etc. But DONT touch my bikes

[orangeokie]

More break-in philosophy

 

I'm glad I did a search before posting. I see this has already been discussed. I was reading the "oil consumption" thread and it reminded me of moto-man's break-in procedures. I am curious as to who followed "factory" procedures, and who followed "moto-man's" (ie. Ken @ Evoluzione). Most of the critical posts in this thread seem to have been written by people who perhaps did not critically/thoroughly read moto-man's procedures, and his explanations as to "why" it is best.

 

I'm not a mechanical engineer, but I can understand his arguments, and they make sense to me. If I end up with a brand new bike, I'm going to follow his procedures.

 

I would be interested to hear from those who are having oil consumption problems as to the break-in procedure you used.