Pressureangle

NOOOoooo... I installed a Jeffries ECU in my 1100 Sport-i and tuned it well enough to take on a `10k tour last year, refined it through the first half, trimmed it the second half, and touched it up a little this year before the South'n Spine Raid. I think I've convinced myself it's close enough to work on the other projects now lol.

Those tiny pushrods are so cute! I'd make a bracelet out of them.

As an tangential anecdote; I play with classic cars, and have a good friend in the restoration business. Primarily he's concerned with Chrysler products of the 60s and 70s. One of his regular customers asked if he'd return to service a pristine MG Midget that had been parked for a decade. He asked if I'd help, because I have some experience with English cars and bikes. After the typical fuel system service and fluid changes, it came to life quite easily, all under the criticism of my friend. "Go-cart" "Tiny motor" "Why would anyone bother?". Needless to say, he drove it around for a full week, taking it everywhere including a car show. When I pressed him to admit it was a good time, of course he did; What we isolated as the true source of the fun was that you could drive the car about as hard as you cared to, without risking limb and license. Banging up through third gear with your foot on the floor and the top down is different but almost as good as blowing the tires up on a '70 440 'Cuda, and a lot less likely to attract points to your license. Point being, I spent most of my life searching for performance improvements in everything I ever owned, only to discover that a great deal of it would have been better spent riding what was there instead of working on it. A 'Guzzi is what it is. Trying to make it something else may be fun and satisfying, but if the actual research and development isn't a good time in itself, it isn't worth the loss of actual riding time. I ask myself, "How often am I actually at WOT?" Rarely. I do, however, take the time to fine tune what's there and I separate projects now so I can pursue what I feel like at the moment. <shrug> Defining the ends to our means is important.

Re; high compression pistons. The historic battle within hemispherical combustion chambers is always between compression and detonation. Firstly, in the U.S., the DOT mandates than anything sold for highway use operate on 87 octane fuel without destroying itself. So, if you're willing to use premium always (who doesn't, anyway?) there is a little room for increases. Here's where things get messy. Firstly, tuning an engine to take advantage in the difference between 87 and 93 octane is something only an expert with a dynomometer, or a very experienced butt and ears, can do meaningfully. Secondly, there really isn't that much difference anyway. If you're capable of such, you're also capable of tuning your intake and exhaust, fuel and timing as is to achieve 80% of the difference with such a mild compression increase. Lastly, altitude and camshaft have huge effect on cylinder pressures, particularly at the medium RPM range where detonation is most prevalent. Hemispherical combustion chambers are the most efficient design from the perspective of (2-valve) valve/flow size and efficiency. But they are the worst for detonation. The most effective counter to detonation is turbulence during compression, which achieves 2 specific things; improves homogenization of the mixture which removes 'dead' or 'late' spots in the burn; and speeds completion of burn which removes unburned mixture from corners which overpressure and detonate. Without enormous and expensive changes, there's little we can do with stock Guzzi castings to improve squish, which creates turbulence. What I did on my LM1000 though, was to carefully measure quench-the actual distance between the piston and head- to be certain it was optimized. The term 'quench' is used, because it's known that the fuel/air mix *cannot* ignite within a narrow margin of distance. That distance is somewhere between .050" and .025". It's typically recognized that the worst contained distance for detonation with gasoline is about .080". You can measure your quench with a piece of soft solder through the spark plug hole, to discover to some degree where you are and if taking a little off your cylinders may have some benefit. IIRC I took about .015" off the LM, which raised the compression by about half a point. That said, it has a Web 86b camshaft, which although has far more lift than the stock cam, also creates much more cylinder pressure in the low RPMs. The combination requires that I retard the timing a couple degrees from stock to kill any apparent detonation. Tuning is ongoing, currently. I always read these back before posting, and I'm never sure they convey sufficiently the information. :/

If you haven't run the engine it's fine. Just flush the clutch compartment out with mineral spirits. You can plug the drain hole with a little piece of wood or plastic, then add a quart of spirits, wobble around as much as you can for a minute and drain it. What little lube stays stuck will be absorbed in the dust and be covered by new dust. Worst possible case is you find it's invaded the friction surfaces (shouldn't have, really, unless you pulled the clutch lever while the compartment was full) and you have to change the clutch, which is your only other option now anyway. Give it a shot. BTW, the hole you're looking into is for timing the engine. There are flywheel marks to use with a timing light.

Thanks for that great shot, Docc. My '97 Sport-i is wide sump and has the same basic design as this photo, BUT they've corrected a flaw. Mine, where the 6mm bolt passes through the bracket has a broached flat for the head, leaving a hard machined corner right in the angle behind the bolt head. Here, they've raised the boss for the bolt and spot-faced, keeping the forging intact. If this bracket is available, I'll upgrade mine as I verified that it was cracking and welded a repair. The leg itself, though, is still short and mine has only the short nub to deploy it. The obvious answer here is just to install later V11 parts. If they're available, and not prohibitively expensive.

Sport injected is wide sump with additional 6mm bolt.

I'm not at all sure. I saw a couple different versions at the SSR.

How many different V11 models share the sidestand leg with 1100 Sport-i? One thing on the long list is the possibility of manufacturing new, sturdier and possibly relocated sidestand brackets. Recently someone stated their leg was broken off in shipping; my own stand has the foot nearly worn off, and I extended the leg a bit by drilling and tapping a bolt into the bottom of the foot. Not a pretty solution. So then, since brackets are already in my mind, what could be the demand for the leg itself? Perhaps if it was 1/4", 1/2" longer? Opinions? We have a military-grade aluminum forge nearby, with what I think is fantastic pricing- that is, on things they already have dies for- and their minimum order is 400. That's a lot of legs. What's the thought on having new ones made? Or is it better just to find a suitable replacement somewhere and make it work?

Yes, you could. We do not have a lobby, but we can receive customers. PM me for contact information.

I did my 10k on my 1100 Sporti with the factory tool kit (I assume it was actually correct to the bike) a 4" crescent wrench, the appropriate allen wrenches for the seat, rear axle, calipers, fairing and valve covers, the necessary socket for the front axle, an 11mm wrench for valve adjustment, a couple spare fuses and relays, and after my 4th tipover a spare spark plug and plug cap which should have been a no-brainer before I started out. I had ordered a tire repair kit with CO2 canister, but it didn't arrive before I left. I did in fact have a flat tire on the road up to Mt. Palomar- very lucky it was only a short walk to the ranger station and I had friends in Cupertino who drove over with a plug kit and tire pump. There was only enough cell service to get a text out, no calling a tow from there.

Maybe it's all a matter of familiarity and perspective.

I often wonder why on earth European countries allow Americans to drive there with nothing more than a valid licence from the USA. Though it may be an official law in Italy and other places, I've never been questioned upon renting a vehicle. I have, however, wished I'd had some frackin' driver training for local regs. Germany has some very weird road rules, and I got a ticket in Rome for passing through an intersection in a bus lane. I suppose it was marked, but hey...

I had a friend who had two sidecars, one on his Sportster- we went 'ice racing' on the lake one New Year's night, so cold the beer froze after we opened it... The other was a 750 GSXR flat tracker. Imagine a half mile on that one.

Not pointing at you, just remembering something I learned the hard way a long time ago.

I do not understand putting a sidecar on a sporting motorcycle, unless it's somehow physically more comfortable to ride in that position. I choose it, not because it's the *most* comfortable, but because I tolerate it very well and it's the motorcycle I want to be on when I get where I'm going to ride it. <shrug> Don't put your taste in other people's mouths.

I used high-quality high-pressure (modern EFI) fuel line, nylon fabric covered. It's gone 15k miles so far. It is larger in diameter than convenient, and stiff to route; I may when the time comes, plumb everything in metal and use only enough flexible hose to connect it all up. As far as the heat goes, once everything heat soaks to saturation, it really doesn't matter what it's made of or how you shield it. I put my pump (external, mine) in front of the frame and the filter under the tank. Has an occasional burp when red-hot in traffic, but never fails.

Don't misread me, I understand and appreciate the effort and the purpose. It's just not something I want to add to my psychological load.

Um yeah I already have way too many parasitic costs in my life I'm trying to simplify. If I needed hosting more than a couple times a year, or in some volume, or if it was profitable I'd do that. These days, I just let the internet work as organically as it does, which means there are holes and conflicts that I'm not willing to invest time to resolve, like this one. I have no idea why some people can't view the photos- that's a question for Jaap.

Can't see them using Microsoft browsers. The images are stored on Google. Follow the link; https://photos.app.goo.gl/G0SLNpS3doQyIRSx2

Squint.

Ah, no; just saw something Docc posted with that logo, looked it up and poached it. I was getting some other shirts done, and asked if she could do this. So she can. So you can too! Pookie's Place! I bought a few shirts, and the 'Guzzi shirt is premium Gildan so I don't know the exact price, but they were all just a bit north of $15, all custom like this too. I told her if it came out nice a few people might call it up. She'll do big, small, colors, whatever you want.

So, I did big on the back and small on the front. Big would be cool on the front, too.

There are a couple distinctions that need to be made; First, between what is theoretically possible between a valve of a certain size, and an inlet opening of a certain size. Secondly, between what Mother Goose has built, and what is theoretically possible between the existing valve and existing inlet opening. On injected Guzzis, moving the port mouth is a huge undertaking, so we are realistically left modifying what's between the inlet and the valve. So no, there is no way to make a Guzzi (or 2-valve Ducati) flow as well a modern 2-valve automotive port, simply because the ports are not as straight. Laminar flow is a function of velocity and delta of direction; if the change of direction is too severe, flow separates and becomes turbulent. So because we can't move the ends of the port, we have very limited ability to reduce the severity of change of direction. I'll have to hunt in my data and see if I have a record of the stock cfm on my LeMans heads to compare with what's there now, and if somebody can come up with a stock V11 head data that would be interesting as well. The thing about cams is that they're a lot of labor to change, relative to heads, they're not cheap, and ultimately still suffer the limitations of the stock heads.

The major concern is velocity, because that's what rams in the most air before the intake valve closes. Velocity and port shape have a correlated relationship; air will turn a given corner smoothly only up to a certain velocity. Then things get turbulent and the velocity is lost. So you smooth the path, and do it over again. There is a point of velocity at which mixture goes supersonic, and no larger volume can be drawn in; this is the point at which the port volume must be enlarged, to control velocity. Reduced high-rpm velocity also causes reduced low-rpm velocity, which hurts drivability. 'Guzzi heads as cast cannot be brought near the theoretical maximum velocity for intake valve size, because they simply have too sharp a bend, particularly in the port floor which leads to separation at relatively lower velocity (inertia of the mixture 'leaps' from the floor, like separating from an old carnival carpet slide). So no matter how you shape the port, ultimate charge density is lower than a better port with the same intake valve size. So, if you raise the port floor and D-shape the intake port, you increase the potential velocity before separation but without raising the port roof, you reduce volume and increase velocity past the point where the charge goes supersonic at high rpm and you lose top end power. Not to say that there isn't some room for improvement this way, but no path to theoretical maximum without raising the roof. To the statement above, "hogging the bowl" only leads to a worsening of port floor shape. This is not specific flow bench and dynomometer data from Moto Guzzi testing, this is general port design theory coupled with conversations with my engine guy about my '85 LM1000 heads (and 25 years of engine development discussion). So it's my somewhat informed opinion that having a competent and experienced flow bench man port your heads is very valuable, and easy for any garage mechanic to install, and the best bang for buck simply because a different cam is still sucking through the same holes. We're not talking about turning a Honda CB into a superbike, a V11 is already closer to max potential than some pedestrian under-performing engine- the stock cam is pretty stout by most OEM measures. That is to say, a 'hot' cam isn't as much different in your Goose as it would be in your '85 Chevrolet. So the more air you can suck in through the ports, the better the cam can work as is. Is any of this clear? While Guzzi ports are not "good" compared to a lot of other engines, it's still the least expensive place to find significant gains IMO and benefits any other mods you may make besides.