biesel Posted March 31, 2006 Share Posted March 31, 2006 ONLINE! ONLINE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biesel Posted March 31, 2006 Author Share Posted March 31, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrt Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Biesel, you rock! Nice looking bikes- what's the difference from the 1100's? For that matter- why offer a lower displacement model? Money? Emmisions? They don't look any lighter....I don't understand the marketing. Any opinions??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
not_scooter_Scura! Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 Biesel, you rock! Nice looking bikes- what's the difference from the 1100's? For that matter- why offer a lower displacement model? Money? Emmisions? They don't look any lighter....I don't understand the marketing. Any opinions??? 84548[/snapback] "you can't handle an 1100 Lov, oh...look here.... they come in 850 as well!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AdamofKC Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 PLEASE BRING IT TO THE STATES!!!! PLEASE! PLEASE! PLEASE! I WANT THE BREVA 850!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gthyni Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 hope it is a april fools joke, the Breva 850 is 50 kilos heavier than the Breva 750. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Nogbad Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 hope it is a april fools joke,the Breva 850 is 50 kilos heavier than the Breva 750. 84573[/snapback] Weird really, you would think putting a bigger hole in a piece of metal ought to make it lighter... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Minnaert Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 the Breva 850 is 50 kilos heavier than the Breva 750 why, the breva 750 is smallblock engine, the 850 is the bigblock. 1100> 850? well: stroke from 80>66mm, one sparkplug, shorther primary gearratio, no oilcooler. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlaing Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 I was really hoping they had turned the small block into a less than 200Kg, greater than 50HP, fun machine with Upside down forks and monoshock...but no. I really don't get this except to save a little on the price, the insurance, the registration fees, the fuel, etc. Maybe it was for the nostalgia of the old 850s, but nostalgia is more based on the style of the bike. This bike should be fast enough with a light rider. I think it loses about 10% peak HP and 20% peak torque: You probably have to rev it more, but I'll bet it is pretty smooth (read boring) I suppose they are trying to follow the Ducati Monster marketing strategy. I don't know why one would get the lower end Monsters but they sell. For me, NO THANK YOU PIAGGO GUZZI I want more, not less power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrt Posted April 1, 2006 Share Posted April 1, 2006 why, the breva 750 is smallblock engine, the 850 is the bigblock. This is why it's confusing to me. I'm not even sure they CAN use the smallblock (which originally was designed for what- a 500cc? and it's a dry sump...and it holds a miniscule amount of oil, so cooling would be a big issue). But unfortunately, it seems both blocks are reaching the end of their useful life. However, if they had used the smallbock motor at least they would have saved a bunch on weight, which to me is more important than having more raw horsepower. Eh, what do I care- I'll probably never have either, anyway. Damn kids...get off my lawn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlaing Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 (which originally was designed for what- a 500cc? 84650[/snapback] ...and a 350! But with the Lario, I think they were getting 60HP at the pistons, but then again, maybe that is why it had some reliability problems. The 750Breva and Nevada appear to be much better built for reliability than the 650s with less peak HP and smoother running engine. Making an 850 from the small block may have been pushing it or not practical. Still a small block with good suspension would be a blast to ride even with just 40RWHP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete roper Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 Dave, did you notice the bore/stroke figures? That thing is just going to LOVE to be revved! I'd be looking at beefing up the rods and valvetrain and ensuring oil delivery was up to it then I'd go chasing revs! On a two valve hemi a motor like this is where forced induction really begins to look like an interesting possibility as you need the revs for power but cylinder fill at only 14PSI will mean that the VE will drop right off at higher RPM. Stick a supercharger on it with some sort of wastegate arrangement that will not start delivering much boost until the VE drops off and then kicks in and you could have a recipe for something that would be awesomely funny to ride Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve G. Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I don't see the point really. The things are underpowered as it is. I would have little patience revving the shit out of something to make it go. Ciao, Steve G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocker59 Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I don't see the point really. The things are underpowered as it is. I would have little patience revving the shit out of something to make it go. Ciao, Steve G. 84671[/snapback] Tiered licensing in some countries. Some insurance companies grade on cc's. Alternative to a fully optioned 1100. (delete oil cooler and twin-spark ignition to save money). Etc, etc... FWIW, Buell's 984cc XB9 is the rev-happy little brother of the 1203cc XB12. Only difference in the motors is stroke dimension. Bore is the same. The XB9 revs faster and has it's redline set 700 rpm higher. Great fun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete roper Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 I don't see the point really. The things are underpowered as it is. I would have little patience revving the shit out of something to make it go. Ciao, Steve G. 84671[/snapback] Steve, I too wouldn't want one, but for all the people who seem to be obsessed with geting an antedeluvian bit of shit to make 100BHP some sort of forced induction would seem to me to be the only feasible way of doing it and there *is* fun to be had by revving the ring out of a Guzzi. My little hot-rod was built with exactly that in mind and I got 84RWBHP out of 891cc @9750RPM which i thought was pretty damn good for an old roundfin. As I've said before I tend to think that the horses on the dyno I used had remarkably short legs but even so taking that thing up through the gears was an absolute joy, what killed it was oil pump cavitation and I got fed up with doing big end shells on a regular basis. Then i realized it was a cop magnet, and THEN I realized that i wasn't getting any younger and it was a sure fire way for an ageing wobbler like myself to kill myself so I gave it away . Do I miss it? Not a bit! But a piped up and correctly fueled Griso will give me similar power with a slightly heavier bike and it'll see out my riding days. That doesn't mean that for those who are chasing that magical, (and to me completely meaningless!) 100BHP figure forced induction, especially on a ery revvy motor, wouldn't be the way to go. Pete Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now