V11 Lemans, Rosso Corsa, new member

[Guest ratchethack]

Ultimate performance isn't the issue. You can adjust and set the fi EXACTLY to make the engine perform best. Air and fuel ratio set precisely with the bike under load as it would be on the road.

And yes, you do need a dyno to do this,why buy a computer controlled bike, then guess if it's set up right?

You may or may not get close thru guesswork- a dyno tells you down to one decimal point where your stoichiometric ratio is at any given rpm.

I like tinkering myself, but I know that it will always run better if it's been dyno'd.

60895[/snapback]

Big J, your point is well taken. When it comes to pursuing perfection, you've got nearly limitless options and resources these days. I'm a tinkerer myself, so the Guzzi is a natural fit for me too. But to my way of thinking, on any machine, when pursuing some level of excellence in state of tune, there's a point where the return on effort begins to drop off. With most "modern" bikes, it appears to me that the dyno has become the performance tool of choice. To a lesser degree, it's used with the idea of pursuing "tuning perfection". After all, on the dyno, the object is most often improvements in power and torque curves, with A/F ratios for the most part being more of an afterthought in the "that's nice to know" category. In other words, "let's see if we can get it more in range - IF it doesn't hurt the curves."

 

To my way of thinking, relative to other marques, you can go a long way toward tuning a Guzzi for outstanding "real world" performance for the road at a relatively low level of effort and cost, after which you can begin to pour on virtually limitless resources - but with only marginal results that will never be significant either on the dyno or the track.

 

The idea of owning a Guzzi is actually attractive to me because of the fact that Guzzi's don't remotely resemble state-of-the-art competition-oriented bikes available from a dozen other marques. If you can consider your garden-variety high-zoot performance bikes to be like high-powered sniper rifles, Guzzi's to me are more like grenades - gettin' 'er "close" is plenty good enough to be 100% effective at achieving the mission objective.

 

Sometimes it's easy to forget that these things were designed 40 years before average riders had access to dyno's, and that they've stuck around because (among other things), riders can still tune 'em up plenty good enough for road use with a few simple tools at home. Now that everyone seems to have access to a dyno just around the corner, I understand the temptation of spending a lot of time and money tuning for absolute perfection - but on such a relatively low-performance bike - I guess I don't quite see the point. Knowing down to one decimal point where my stoichiometric ratio is at any given RPM has...well, nothing at all to do with my riding enjoyment, but again - I'm a bit of a Guz Geez, that's just me, and as always, YMMV.

[big J]

Fair enough. I'd fitted the usual stuff,PC111,Stucci,Mistrals, drilled airbox. Having spent the dough, I wanted to make sure all was working to their optimum, otherwise what was the point?

The bike was on the dyno for about 4 hours, during that time we played about with the fuel map to reduce the 3500-4000 rpm dip, adjusted it for roll-on response and set it up for best economy at steady throttle settings. You cannot do this by tweaking in the garden.

Cost was 120 euros, around $150(?) Ive probably saved more than that in fuel costs since.

Agreed,these things were designed before popular access to dynos, but in that time emissions reglations have forced manufacturers to set bikes up from the factory to pass beurocratic laws, not develop maximum power and torque for the benefit of the rider, hence the popularity of cans,filters,PC111's, etc.

I used to help out in Specials, a hi-po sports bike building shop in Glasgow, many guys would bring their bikes in for a tune up, not just sports bikes, and there was never a bike whose responsiveness couldn't be improved with a run on the dyno.

[Guest ratchethack]

Fair enough. I'd fitted the usual stuff,PC111,Stucci,Mistrals, drilled airbox. Having spent the dough, I wanted to make sure all was working to their optimum, otherwise what was the point?

The bike was on the dyno for about 4 hours, during that time we played about with the fuel map to reduce the 3500-4000 rpm dip, adjusted it for roll-on response and set it up for best economy at steady throttle settings. You cannot do this by tweaking in the garden.

Cost was 120 euros, around $150(?) Ive probably saved more than that in fuel costs since.

I salute you sir. Sounds like money very well spent. If I didn't already have an "off the shelf" map that seems to work perfectly with my own tuning efforts, I'd more'n likely do the same - one time - and not fiddle with my intake and exhaust config. again for a long time. Now I'm off to the garden again for a little Guzzi tweaking...

 

EDIT: Hey BigJ - what were your final hp and torque peaks - come on, I KNOW you know 'em!

 

My interest is strictly academic, y'unnerstan'!

[pete roper]

To my way of thinking, relative to other marques, you can go a long way toward tuning a Guzzi for outstanding "real world" performance for the road at a relatively low levels of effort and cost, after which you can begin to pour on virtually limitless resources - but with only marginal results that will never be significant either on the dyno or the track. 

 

60899[/snapback]

 

 

(Gwerble!!!!) Wot he said, with bells on!!!!

 

Pete

[Ouiji Veck]

The bike was on the dyno for about 4 hours, during that time we played about with the fuel map to reduce the 3500-4000 rpm dip, adjusted it for roll-on response and set it up for best economy at steady throttle settings. You cannot do this by tweaking in the garden.

60906[/snapback]

 

I'm getting 42-43mpg and cleaning my buddys clock on his 900 Monster

( I can't belive how this thing corners...I have no chicken strips)

 

I'm a total guzzi nut because of the '80 SP I rebuilt.

I fell in love with the Briggs and Stratton technology.

At the time I owned a 170mph CBR1000 that I put 54000 mi on

witout anything more than gas oil and new plugs once.

 

I'm trying to find someone to try my "adj. the TBs on the fly"

tecnique to validate my own results getting rid of the notorious "hiccup"

in an effort to get the Aprillia Cooties back out of the Guzzi blood line.

 

Aprillia Cooties! Aprillia Cooties! Aprillia Cooties!

Don't call NASA...you can just use a fly swatter. (maybe)

[jrt]

I'm trying to find someone to try my "adj. the TBs on the fly"

tecnique to validate my own results getting rid of the notorious "hiccup"

in an effort to get the Aprillia Cooties back out of the Guzzi blood line.

 

60945[/snapback]

 

I'm all over that like a cheap suit.

You did the adjusting at low rpms or at speed?

[Guest n5385j]

I did'nt buy a pure sport bike because your prone to racing and getting careless. Guess what, my v11 has a tendancy to be ridden more sport than tour. I'm up in the 5-6K tach range every time I take it on the open road because I can't help it and it feels great. There is nothing like that pre-dawn open highway to test that raw power and handling. After chucking down 10,000 USD on this bad boy, I expect it to purr like a kitten. And I guess that's the point. I know, I know, nothings certain in this life.

About tinkering, I'm not confident in my abilities to pull off all those things discussed in this forum. (Whats this extra bolt from? ) The last time I opened up my motocross (clutch) it spilled out over the shop floor in high school. It was an expensive lesson. Man, if anyone lived near me to come on over, or is anyone going to the DC/MD rally? Maybe I can get a visual on all these glossary terms. Anyhoo, I put another 250 break-in miles on it today. See you on the next forum discussion. Thanks mates!

[Guest ratchethack]

(Gwerble!!!!) Wot he said, with bells on!!!!

 

Pete

60938[/snapback]

Hey, I got a "Gwerble!!!" out of Pete! I reckon it's better than a "Bleargh!!!".

[Martin Barrett]

Hey, I got a "Gwerble!!!" out of Pete!  I reckon it's better than a "Bleargh!!!".

60958[/snapback]

 

 

Congratulations.

 

I couldn't find a picture of a "Gwerble" but here's a Gerbil to add to your signature to mark this monumentous occasion

 

 

[big J]

Ratchet, peak power at the wheel was 85bhp, torque peaked at 65 ft/lbs at around 4000rpm.(cant find the bloody disc)

However, as I said, the purpose was not to chase every last pony, but to set up the fi at all revs and loads and try to smooth out the dip at 3500-4000 rpm.

This was mostly successful and I'm more than happy with the results.

[Ouiji Veck]

I'm all over that like a cheap suit.

You did the adjusting at low rpms or at speed?

60951[/snapback]

I did the adjusting in and around where the hiccup farts were..

3200 and 3800 rpm in my case...I'd crank a 1/16 turn on the knob...ride a little (maybe a mile-purposely trying to get it to hiccup) trying to stay around one of those #s ..still hiccup and fart...I'd try another 1/16 turn...repeat...

I did 6 counter clockwise..with no improvement...went back to zero and started going clock wise.

At 5 ..1/16th turns I thought it was better...at 6 ...definately better...at 7 purrrfect.

And I mean purrrfect...not nothing...not the slightest skip or blip anywhere...I also noticed when I was on the right track the "backing off" detonation when shutting off the throttle at higher RPMs

got quieter and quieter. Now, if I'm doing say 6Krpm and completly close the throttle

or down shift hard for a corner it just goes " DRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR" (like my perfectly tuned Duc)

Instead of "DrrrBak! Bak!Bak!rrrBak!rrrr" (I'm wondering if this is comprehensible?)

It also got rid of embarrasing hesitation off the line. ..from dead stop to rolling out.

This all is in relation to the problem of hiccups and farts at flat throttle..just cruzin'

ie: TB synch...as far as I know. If there's a problem skipping or farting under throttle

it may be or probably is something more complicated...

[Guest ratchethack]

Ratchet, peak power at the wheel was 85bhp, torque peaked at 65 ft/lbs at around 4000rpm.(cant find the bloody disc)

However, as I said, the purpose was not to chase every last pony, but to set up the fi at all revs and loads and try to smooth out the dip at 3500-4000 rpm.

This was mostly successful and I'm more than happy with the results.

60963[/snapback]

Ya gotta like it, BigJ. But don't you mean ~5-5.5K RPM for your torque peak? If you really peaked at 4K I'd like to understand how you shifted it down so low and how the curve is shaped. Have you found your disk yet?? Also - If your mods followed my "seat of the pants dyno" with much the same config., you got a significant smoothing out of the 3.5-4K RPM dip with the Stucchi crossover.

[Baldini]

Well I dunno but I guess I'm with big J. I've had Tontis over 20 yrs & no-one's touched em save me. They go fine - still on points & carbs tuned by ear - plugs out one at a time, adj idle screw then balance then back & forwards till running sweet. But TPS etc - PC111??? @#!#$# off!!! I put it with a dyno - got it running very good clean thru. Maybe some can do that by feel but to me electricity & petrol don't mix....give it to a man who's got the tools. Similar mods, similar figures to Big J's, max torque @ 5.5k. Only complaint I have is below 2.5k the operator obviously didn't consider that anyone would run these revs being mostly on Japs - so it is a bit short there. Sure another session would sort it.

 

KB