"old" V11 sport frame

[luhbo]

Fiddling with springs and frames (and ecus) surely can and will satisfy the one or other. Especially after X-mas - every spring the same spring issues.

 

Honestly, how many bikes running all over the world are suspension optimised? What do you think. My guess is: much less then one percent. You go to a shop and buy your bike. In 100% of all cases they will sell you the bike you point at, regardless whether you look like a racer-kid or more like the HOG presi.

 

In the automotive industry there is something called the 90% male and 95% female (or vice versa). Maybe for bikes the numbers are a bit different. But for this group the bikes have to fit. And they do fit. Buy them, check the oil, RTFM and ride off!

 

There is an aftermarket spring and damper industry and their products can in most cases improve your bike. But talking about safety issues if you want to or have to ignore their products is a bit over the edge in my eyes. Especially when we are talking about modern Italian bikes. They aren't 70's Kawas, are they?

 

If all what Ratchet said really was so important to be done, then the KR of course whould be a bit dangerous. The devil in such a nice disguise. But, as already said in some posts earlier, can you prove all your "I'm sure I'd probably had..."?

 

Hubert

[Guest ratchethack]

Interesting take, Hubert. Please forgive my focus on me here, I can only speak for myself.

 

Coupla things:

 

I'm sure that fewer than 5% of riders care about optimizing suspension. Frankly, I suspect mostly ignorance and neglect are the reasons riders don't do it - but who cares what the reasons might be? The popular consensus -- here, as in so very many other cases -- is not where I want to be.

 

I enjoy riding very much, and I particularly enjoy staying alive. Put me in that 5%, if you please.

 

"Sporting" motorcycles ought to handle at least as well as they're designed to handle. If not, what's the point, or did you just want a parade float?

 

Manufacturers occasionally screw up on spring rates. The .6 kg/mm springs in the Marz forks on Guzzis was a particularly bad screw-up, unless you weigh ~135 lb.

 

Matching one rate to every rider and his average cargo carrying load is an impossibility. Every rider must at least understand whether or not his motorcycle is safe - or risk the consequences. Not making a choice is in fact a bad choice that accepts certain risks.

 

As a few have found themselves quite surprised to discover, not paying close enough attention to suspension setup can be a risk wherein the stakes are nothing less than your life.

 

I bet my life on my ability to get my suspension right every day I spend riding on mountain roads in some pretty dangerous terrain. I've made myself very familiar with the consequences of not getting it right. I get a reminder every time I see the meat wagon hauling down the formless, oozing remains of someone in the back who IMHO had far greater than a 95% probability of not caring about suspension settings. It happens every weekend day, all summer long in the local mountains. . . . . I reckon the 5% of riders who've set up correctly ride their bikes down in lieu of an ambulance somewhere close to 100% of the time . . . . . . .

 

I get it right and I ride with great enthusiasm, with great pleasure, on a superbly handling machine, with safety, and with confidence.

 

And you?

[BrianG]

I suppose that 90% of riders ride at 10% of the capacity of their motorcycles capability, and everyone in that group is happy-happy.

 

Another 5% ride way over their head and end up on the asphalt complaining about the machine. For them, optimization might be a margin of error to protect the incompetent.

 

It's the 5% of riders, like that dork Ratchethack, that feel that their equipment should be optimized for themselves. Not that they ride at 90% much, but they just enjoy the satisfaction of squeezing everything possible out of a nice piece of machinery. Optimized equipment provides both greater maximum performance potential, as well as greater riding comfort at moderate performance levels.

 

There are engineering compromises in motorcycles that have far more effect on performance than similar compromises in automobiles have. This is because the "load" is generally a greater percentage of the total mass. Also, there are legal-engineering compromises that argue toward designed stability, often at the cost of performance.

 

The differences that are being discussed here are probably useful for the perfectionists among us more than the racers, because the real hot-foot riders wouldn't be herding a 500lb /90 hp Guzzi around the curves when there are 300lb /150 hp rocket sleds out there.

 

A custom fit suit doesn't perform that much better than one off the rack, but to some of us, it feels sooooooo much better................ especially since we did the fitting ourselves.

[luhbo]

That's more or less exactly my point of view as well, Brian. What I like most is the sentence "I did it myself and it feels perfect" or so.

 

I'm still strictly against the saying, not fiddling with the springs and sags would be a somewhat suicidal behaviour. That's nonsense because it's so far off of practical life.

I can also read nearly every day about someone who blew his mind out on a bike. And I'm quite sure, nearly 100% of those people had the wrong weight for their non adjusted fork springs. What sense should it make to combine these two statements?

 

Hubert

[Guest ratchethack]

It's the 5% of riders, like that dork Ratchethack, that feel that their equipment should be optimized for themselves.  Not that they ride at 90% much, but they just enjoy the satisfaction of squeezing everything possible out of a nice piece of machinery.  Optimized equipment provides both greater maximum performance potential, as well as greater riding comfort at moderate performance levels.

This must be absurdly dorky, non-consensus, non-GROUPTHINK kinda behavior.

 

But other than ignorance and neglect (as mentioned above), what OTHER reasons for NOT optimizing suspension are there?

 

Enquiring minds just gotta know!!!!

 

AFAIK, it's been a "basic necessity" kinda recommendation of the Pro's in the know since formerly rigid frames first crawled outta the ocean with suspenders on 'em . . . . . .

 

My dorky little brain strugges so hard sometimes . . . . .

[luhbo]

Did anybody say there was a reason for not optimizing the suspension?

[Guest ratchethack]

Did anybody say there was a reason for not optimizing the suspension?

EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEPPP!.......I've suggested ignorance and neglect as reasons not to do it twice.

 

Why do YOU s'pose so few do it? There's either a reason or there's NOT a reason. . . . ?

 

D'you s'pose there's NO REASON NOT to optimize the suspension?!

 

That's a double negative and now my dorky little head is startin' to hurt.

 

If there's NO REASON NOT TO, why not just......."do it?"

 

The mind reels. . . . . .

[Ballacraine]

As a related throwaway comment.

 

It still seems to me that the modern extremely high level of adjustability is a bit of a cop out.

 

I appreciate there are barrow loads of variables involved, but to have 997 different settings or whatever seems like the manufacturers saying:

 

'Well, we can't get it right...Maybe you can?'

 

We were perfectly safe on our low tech non adjustable bikes, now they have given us lots more opportunity to cock it up!

 

Nige.

[BrianG]

As a related throwaway comment.

 

It still seems to me that the modern extremely high level of adjustability is a bit of a cop out.

 

I appreciate there are barrow loads of variables involved, but to have 997 different settings or whatever seems like the manufacturers saying:

 

'Well, we can't get it right...Maybe you can?' 

 

We were perfectly safe on our low tech non adjustable bikes, now they have given us lots more opportunity to cock it up! 

 

Nige.   

94434[/snapback]

 

We were perfectly safe on our 45 hp 400 lb Nortons and BSA's.

 

I think the era of 150hp / 300 lb race-replicas has substantially changed the paradigm of what's acceptable.

[Ballacraine]

Could well be!

 

Nige.

[Baldini]

....it really helped my confidence knowing what I'm supposed to be doing when heading into a blind bumpy downhill corner at 85mph  )....

 

Praying?

[Guest Nogbad]

Did anybody say there was a reason for not optimizing the suspension?

94406[/snapback]

 

Cost and time. That's two reasons. I would have added a fanatical devotion to the Pope, but couldn't work out what that would have to do with the suspension on a Guzzi.

[Guest ratchethack]

Did anybody say there was a reason for not optimizing the suspension? 

Cost and time. That's two reasons. I would have added a fanatical devotion to the Pope, but couldn't work out what that would have to do with the suspension on a Guzzi. 

BWWZZZAAAAAAAAPPPPPP! [the disqualification buzzer]

 

With all due respect, dear Nog - no need to bring Papal devotions to bear. I believe this is a matter not of faith, but of simple common sense.

 

Are "cost" and "time" valid reasons not to replace tires?

Is keeping tires up to pressure and in good operating condition "fanatical devotion"?!

 

A Guzzi can be re-sprung once - and for all practical purposes permanently - for about the same cost of mounting a set of tires, and with about the same investment of time, even if you have someone else change out tires, and even if you have someone else change out springs.

 

With all the attention given to tires on this Forum, I simply cannot fathom the evident continued widespread ignorance and neglect of suspension setup.

 

I believe those who're far more qualified than myself to know, including every decent owners manual and factory service manual I can remember, advise that getting spring rates correctly matched to load (thereby enabling the laden and unladen sags to be set correctly) is AT LEAST as important as safe, serviceable tires. IMHO it's an order of magnitude greater contribution to riding quality than changing out from the shabbiest Communist slave-labor economy hoops to the latest high-zoot radials at the top of the evaluation charts.

 

Fundamentally serious safety considerations aside, the sheer enjoyment, relative comfort, and relaxation of riding a correctly handling Guzzi without the constant tension of fighting a misbehaving, bucking, unpredictable, wallowing sow around challenging roads and over boring highways alike - with confidence and as much smoothness, precision and grip as the motorcycle was designed with - would seem to fairly handily trump the cost and time considerations. . . . .You won't ever have a clue what it's capabilities are until you get it right, and that's just a fact.

 

BAA, TJM, & YM (at least in y'er case) is more'n likely gonna V.

[Guest ratchethack]

AND ANOTHER THING. . . . .

 

How riders expect to analyze and compare tires with poorly tuned suspensions that completely overwhelm and obliterate any tire's inherent handling and roadholding character is completely beyond me.

 

I'm not a Pro suspension guy by any stretch, but I'll bet many of the most highly qualified among those who ARE would point out that chassis setup is far more important by any possible measure than a selection of tire #1 vs. tire #2 from the latest moto-rag evaluation ranking.

 

If y'er suspension isn't at least dialed-in to "ballpark" range, quibbling about the superior "feel" of one tire over another is akin to arguments over aesthetically pleasing deck chair arrangements on the Titanic, IMHO. OK - that's a little over-dramatic, but I hope you understand my point.

 

As mentioned above, if y'er suspension's not tuned within at least approximate striking range of optimum WRT spring rate, load, and sag settings (for starters), all kinds of squirrely, unpredictable, unbalanced handling can result - even with the latest and very best tire technology!!! Or is having the fattest, latest and greatest "track tire" with the name on the side and a trendy tread pattern just more BLING?!?!?!?!

 

IMHO, this explains many of the most ludicrous comments I read on tire "analysis" and comparos -- and I'm referring not only to posters on moto forums, but ALSO to some of the "moto journalists" who, if anybody, SHOULD at least have access to the basic expertise of fairly quick and easy chassis setup, and really ought to know better -- but who evidently don't make much use of it!!!!

 

Broken Record Crusty Curmudgeon signing off.

[Guest Nogbad]

The old V11 isn't THAT bad on the standard suspension. OK it isn't "plush" and the tracking on rough surfaces is "interesting" meaning that going fast is "courageous" but courage need not be taken to extremes, and as a "cooking" sports tourer the V11 does very nicely.

 

I hardly see suspension modification in the same terms as replacing a bald tyre. Replacing a buggered shock, yes. Modifying from good condition stock, no.

 

The V11 is always going to handle like the big old fashioned shaft drive bike that it is.

 

If you want a rorty, lumpy, thundering V twin that handles like a modern sportsbike, buy one.

 

(It's called a Buell)