V11 Modifications - Opinions?

[pete roper]

Sure most of the current Guzzi owners know that there is more to life than HP, otherwise we would not be riding Guzzis, but Guzzi's future market gives a fat, flying f*ck.

If they hit the 100HP and have models like the MGS01, Norge, and Griso, they will sell at twice the rate of the current Griso and Norge.

83476[/snapback]

 

But Dave, this is what I'm trying to say. They can't, at least not with the current engine. It simply isn't possible for them to get more out of it in it's current guise and retain any semblance of reliability. Likewise they can't increase the capacity appreciably further because the physical constraints of the crankcase won't permit it. If they did a complete re-design of the case they could increase capacity but why would an already cash-strapped company bother doing that when the writing is already on the wall for big, air-cooled engines? It would be madness.

 

Even if Guzzi do launch a fantastic *new* bike with a *modern* motor it isn't, at least in our riding lives, ever going to be a world leading manufacturer in terms of sales. They don't have the production capacity and you can't just say 'Abracadabra!' and magic one out of thin air overnight even if the money was available! I really want to see Guzzi do well and I trully hope to see a new generation of inovative, stunning looking, engineering to come out of the marque, even if it is no onger built in Mandello. But I'm also sensible enough to see that this will NEVER be achieved with the current powerplant.

 

Despite what the brochures say you're average stock V11 motor will produce low to mid 70's HP. Well tuned ones are usually producing in the low to mid eighties. Are you really expecting that with ever more stringent emmission controls somebody is going to find a huge, miraculous, rabbit to pull out of the that that will suddenly overturn 130 years of development of the IC engine and a good 50 years of pushrod driven hemi head motors and give us 20% more HP?

 

If having the words that say that the motor produces 100HP is so important? Well, just say it ! Who really cares apart from the sort of dweeby social inadequates who judge themselves by 'Facts' they can show other dweebs on bits of paper produced by advertising agencies!

 

If people are interested in Guzzis, really interested, they'll go ride one. They'll either be astounded that they haven't discovered something so much fun before or they'll shake their heads in horror and run away screaming! At the end of the day those people who DO like Guzzis will like 'em regardless of what the figures are.

 

I've just done a clutch and gearbox job on a V7 Special. It produces probably 38BHP max, it's a lovely resto though and as someone said in another thread, it's a bit of rolling art! I rode it into town, (A 45 mile round trip.) today and it was bliss. Even though the forks were horrific, the rear suspension was naff and it was happy at only a paltry 80mph it had that most important of *motorbike* things, it had the *feel*, it had the *sound*, my god, it had *SOUL*. Even the later model ones have that, although IMHO it's been watered down and made bland. Thats what people who buy Guzzis, (At least now.) go for, not HP, not razor sharp handling and very rarely even pose factor, (Although I was posing like buggery on the V7 ). They buy them for the feel, and more or less HP won't make a smidgen of difference to that.

 

What does the sticker on the tank say? 'Una Storia Italia'. A bit of Italian History, and one that we can all afford!

 

Pete

[dlaing]

If they keep dropping HP, they'll only end up attracting Ural owners.

I think it is possible to get ten more ponies out of the existing case with a deeper sump(for breathing room),hotter cam and slightly bigger jugs. They would probably have to compromise some bottom end power much like they did with the peakier Daytona.

Put the peaky 100HP at piston rings, 1200cc engine in a street legal MGS01 and you have got sales.

Use the Centauro engine and we have more potential, but allegedly it is expensive to build.

Build a bigger case and compromises would not be necessary.

How hard (expensive) would it really be to build a new case?

I don't think it would bankrupt them.

But heck I sure could be wrong.

And if they did bother to go with a new case, water-cooling is the easiest way for them to reach their goals, but I think many of us would regret if they went to water-cooling.

So, you may have made a good point about a new air cooled case being too expensive...but I am not sure.

[Guzzirider]

A parcel containing my FBF pistons arrived this morning- Mal will be helping me fit them next weekend.

 

I basically agree with the posts on here about not pushing the limits of the motor too far and enjoying a Guzzi for what it is, but that won't stop me fiddling and seeing what the motor can do with a bit of mild modification.

 

I am out of the country for most of July so I am tempted to get the head work done then rather than waiting until winter.

 

Will post a dyno chart on here when I have finished so you can judge for yourself whether my money has been well spent or whether it has been a waste of time.

 

So far I am encouraged by the positive feedback I have received from those who have fitted the FBFs, so fingers crossed.

 

Guy

[polebridge]

IIRC, the only difference between the Ti pipe mounts and the others you mention is the brackets that attach them to the bike.  Use the stock brackets and they end up in the same position as the stock mufflers.

83455[/snapback]

 

Are you sure about that Steve? Have you actually tried it or seen it done? It doesn't look to me as if that will work but if you are correct than that is great news!

 

Thanks for the tip.

[Guest ratchethack]

So, you still recommend that your buddy pull the FBF pistons and drop in the stock pistons?

Well Dave, my buddy is doing what the Head Wrench at his dealer recommended. I didn't have any part in his "decision" except to agree that the wisdom of what he's doing seems to be in line with his objectives.

 

Having successfully passed through the "bigger, better, faster" phase of motorcycling about 20 years ago with no intention of an about-face, I reckon I have a different perspective than you and perhaps lots of others. Is it possible for you to accept that there could be a different philosophy of Guzzi ownership from yours without thinking about it as "wrong"?

 

This is just me, but I figure if going back to stock pistons lets my Pal actually get some enjoyable, stress-free miles on his Guzzi (for the first time!) in trade for a considerable bump in torque - without the unwanted added expense, complexity, and inclination to go dyno tuning and/or learning how to spend many beautiful riding days behind the keyboard juggling rows and columns of numbers - this seems to be as good a choice for him as it would be for me. Like me, my Pal doesn't spend much of his riding time on the road at WOT, wringing out every last ft-lb and bhp that shows up on charts. He figures that around 65 ft-lbs and 80 bhp is more'n adequate for his needs. In fact, he seldom needs or wants even this much! I haven't introduced the concept of "Road Geez" to him yet, but I reckon he'd say the shoe fits!

 

I know this is a terribly difficult thing for many to understand, but I believe that there are actually others out there like my Pal and myself, who aren't necessarily compelled beyond practicality, beyond reason, beyond common sense, and beyond what can be reliably proven historically, to attempt to make a good thing into something it was never designed to be - and in fact, never can be - without the sacrifice of what many wisely consider to be prohibitive trade-offs.

 

I think it's simply marvelous that so many have achieved superior dyno charts to what mine would be! More power to 'em! Y'see, I reckon I haven't been conditioned to the point where this automatically ignites burning hot fires of desire under me, and I'm not at all interested in one-upsmanship. I b'lieve I've been around long enough to recognize the folly of jumping on the old performance treadmill... I may, in fact, never have my bike dyno tuned! What a ridiculous concept, eh? How did I manage to own and enjoy 11 previous bikes over hundreds of thousands of road miles without dyno tuning?! I must've really been missing the boat all those years. Ah....but life is full of such foolishness, ain't it?

 

As Pete so wisely noted:

 

It simply isn't possible.... to get more out of it in it's current guise and retain any semblance of reliability.

.......

Despite what the brochures say you're average stock V11 motor will produce low to mid 70's HP. Well tuned ones are usually producing in the low to mid eighties.

.......

Who really cares apart from the sort of dweeby social inadequates who judge themselves by 'Facts' they can show other dweebs on bits of paper produced by advertising agencies!

.......

At the end of the day those people who DO like Guzzis will like 'em regardless of what the figures are.

.......

people who buy Guzzis, (At least now.) go for..... not HP, not razor sharp handling and very rarely even pose factor ..... They buy them for the feel, and more or less HP won't make a smidgen of difference to that.

Though I may well be in the minority with my philosophy of Guzzi ownership here, Dave, I don't seem to be the only one around (not that I'd likely give it much notice if I were).

 

Dave, could you own a wonderful old V7 like Pete's customer's bike without taking it to the dyno and strapping thousands of dollars worth of the latest "racing" tackle on it, and trying to squeeze every ounce of potential peak output from it? How would you propose to use a Tune Boy on it with no ECU?

 

Y'er riding a living dinosaur, Dave - not a hyper-tech track bike. Best enjoy it f'er wot it is!

 

BAA, TJM, & YMMV

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

A parcel containing my FBF pistons arrived this morning- Mal will be helping me fit them next weekend.

 

I basically agree with the posts on here about not pushing the limits of the motor too far and enjoying a Guzzi for what it is, but that won't stop me fiddling and seeing what the motor can do with a bit of mild modification.

 

I am out of the country for most of July so I am tempted to get the head work done then rather than waiting until winter.

 

Will post a dyno chart on here when I have finished so you can judge for yourself whether my money has been well spent or whether it has been a waste of time.

 

So far I am encouraged by the positive feedback I have received from those who have fitted the FBFs, so fingers crossed.

 

Guy 

83500[/snapback]

 

If you don't get the PCIII map with it I'll send you mine. You'll need it to start dyno testing. It is significantly different than other maps.

[helicopterjim R.I.P.]

I think it's simply marvelous that so many have achieved superior dyno charts to what mine would be!

 

83518[/snapback]

 

Dyno charts are only comparable when done on the same dynomometer.

 

I would find the dyno useful for V11's because they all have that mid-range torque dip that no one wants and a dyno is the best way to verify your changes and modifications are working. I myself would treat the graph as qualitative and not quantitative.

[Guzzirider]

If you don't get the PCIII map with it I'll send you mine. You'll need it to start dyno testing. It is significantly different than other maps.

83523[/snapback]

 

 

Thanks for the kind offer Jim.

 

I will probably end up getting my custom map tweaked by Hobbsport who are the guys who will be doing the work to my heads- they did a fine job last producing a map for the current set up.

 

Need to get the bike run in by 16th April- first track day of the year at Anglesey. Mal and Baldini will be there too on their V11s.

 

Guy

[dlaing]

Is it possible for you to accept that there could be many other riders out there with a different philosophy of Guzzi ownership from yours without thinking about it as "wrong"?  

83518[/snapback]

You mean like using K&N filters?

I think I am generally very open minded to what others want and I feel that I keep butting heads with you for you not being fair and balanced about options for others.

I just think this is one particular case where it would be a sad, wasteful mistake to swap back to stock pistons.

I fully support his right to make that mistake.

I also fully support the right to be dead on the side of the road for not using GEI relays, for using Hawker Genesis batteries, for using Cheng Shin tires, for not changing you 10W30 dino oil for 60,000 miles, and for shredding up your body riding in flip flops and speedos.

I think it is you, that is trapped in your own rigid philosophy, that cannot see that it would be more simple to make the FBF pistons work.

[polebridge]

To dlaing and Ratchethack,

 

Sorry I asked!

 

(not really)

[Guest ratchethack]

You mean like using K&N filters?

Well, err....yeah! Exactly like that!

you....not being fair and balanced about options for others.

"Fair and balanced"?! But I'm not an actor and this isn't "The Factor"! Where's Bill O'Reilly?!

What part of anything I said did you find either "unfair" or "unbalanced", Dave?

I think it is you, that is trapped in your own rigid philosophy, that cannot see that it would be more simple to make the FBF pistons work.

"Rigid philosophy"?! Is this (immediately below) what you mean by that?

I think it's simply marvelous that so many have achieved superior dyno charts to what mine would be!  More power to 'em!

??

 

Yep, that must be right...I'm "trapped" again in "ridgity", with an inability to see how it's necessary to make things "more simple" by band-aiding the need for more technology (and expense) onto a ditch-pump motor...just what my Pal needs to release the hidden "true riding experience" that's lying dormant within his Guzzi, just bustin' to get out! I reckon you've got me pegged, Dave!

 

Look here, Dave. My Pal and I have identical bikes except for mods. We also seem to have very similar riding (Road Geez) objectives. He likes the way my Guzzi runs. He doesn't like the way his runs. I reckon he'll be happy if & when he can enjoy his bike the way I enjoy mine. Is there anything more simple than that?

 

Now I can understand how somebody else with different objectives would have another approach and I wouldn't disagree or fault anybody's alternative. There's no "right & wrong" here, and I don't think I've suggested this? I've simply suggested that there are viable "non-performance oriented" alternatives to the usual "more is better" thing for those with different objectives...

 

QUESTION: When you embark upon a "more is better" modification project on y'er Guzzi, how do you know when y'er done, since "more" has no upper-bounds? It would seem that when y'er "done", it's time to start again in search of "more"?? Or is the "science project without end" the objective in and of itself?

 

Enquiring minds just gotta know!

[Guest ratchethack]

To dlaing and Ratchethack,

 

Sorry I asked!

 

(not really)

I hope you're not too sorry. I know this is kinda tedious...

 

But do you see how weighing opposing viewpoints has value?

 

I think it's kinda fun - but then, I enjoy the proverbial garlic high colonic before running a marathon, too...

 

Y'see, once Dave & I get started, it's sorta like opening a great big can o'

[badmotogoozer]

I think he should definitely get those FBF pistons out of his bike ASAP! (and send them to me!)

 

Rj

[polebridge]

I hope you're not too sorry.  I know this is kinda tedious... <_>

 

But do you see how weighing opposing viewpoints has value?

 

I think it's kinda fun - but then, I enjoy the proverbial garlic high colonic before running a marathon, too...

 

Y'see, once Dave & I get started, it's sorta like opening a great big can o'

83559[/snapback]

 

Not sorry at all actually (except for having the thought of a garlic high colonic pass through my mind for a second there).

 

This is great feedback and very useful information (and I am enjoying the sparring between you two).

 

Thanks to everyone.

[pete roper]

I can understand why people like the idea of heavily tuning their Guzzi motors. For starters, compared to something like a Jap 4 it's comparatively cheap and you can get *improvements* of one sort or another pretty easily. BUT, (there's always the but.) what consistently astounds me is that people seem to be quite happy to spend substantial amounts of time and money making their motors more powerful, (and less reliable!) but entirely neglect their chassis and suspension .

 

I'm not suggesting that all the folks here who are rabid about getting more power out of their engines are guilty of this but it's extraordinarily common and it doesn't matter a fat rat's how much power you have if you can't use it and get it to the ground effectively. Playing with spring rates, damping oil viscosities and compression and rebound damping until you get everything working to the very best of it's abilities will pay much higher dividends than getting another 10HP out of your motor. If you're really keen you can rollerise your rear shock eyes and stick decent grease nipples and seals on all the linkages, (OK, no linkages on V11's but the Breva has them and the Griso.). Modern brakes are pretty damn good as well but if you want to you can start saving ounces in unsprung weight by going to diffrent rotors and if you're insanely rich you can go for aftermarket wheels! All of these things will greatly improve a machine and the rider's enjoyment far more than more power. To my mind the 'Brag Factor' would also be pretty high. Probably not as impresive as a dyno chart though <_ .>

 

 

I don't think either I or Ratchet are suggesting that people shouldn't tune the buggerance out of their motors? (Certainly all I'm trying to do is offer a caution as to what can be realistically expected.) That's a choice entirely for the individual concerned. But you have to accept that the simple laws of physics and engine design parrameters mean that you CAN'T get over 100 BHP, reliably, out of an ancient 1 litre capacity, air cooled, shaft drive twin. I'm sorry. It simply isn't going to happen. Even a well set up 'C' kitted Hi-Cam will struggle to make 100hp and the costs in terms of longevity are very high! As for the R1100,(or whatever.) BMW making 120? Oh look! there goes a squadron of pigs

 

Pete.