Weegie

@andy york I agree Phil has also repeated this several times. So come the summer (long way away) I'll remove the fairing and take it out on a short run,without the bodywork it looks very odd. Even if I did find that it made a difference there isn't much I could do. Besides I've been pretty much through most of the engine a while back and found nothing, including checking the valve timing with dial gauges. Phil put me onto the leaky PRV (which Chuck had also pointed out) and then the substitution of a Griso spring into the PRV. That was a God send and dramatically improved the pressure. However it still runs toasty, I'm not the only HiCam owner with this malady, seen quite a few complaints on the COG (Centauro Owner's Group) forum. Some engines run hot and some don't and I got no clue why. The idea of using 2 coolers though, if to any degree sucessful, would give me a modification that would work, or at a minimum, knowledge that increasing oil cooler volume would reduce temps and some idea of where to go next. It runs Ok in clear air at the moment above 40mph, I just would prefer if I could lower oil temp 5 or 10 degrees, the temp at the heads and exhaust valves I'm probably better off not knowing. Using the 15/50 and the 105-110C oil temp I can still maintain approx 60psi pressure, which is below the max but respectable enough to stop any serious engine damage (I hope). Feels more like a track than a road bike, as long as it's going quick it's a happy engine, but slow down and it turns ugly fast. It's a complete hoot on the open road, best Guzzi I've ridden and I love it, come back from a ride grinning from ear to ear.

Part of the issue is in all likliehood down to the fairing, the bike is a Magni Australia and it's fully faired, not the best choice IMHO for the HiCam especially with a C kit as it produces prodigious amounts of heat, so placing a fairing around it, which reduces the effectivness of cylinder and sump cooling, wasn't a particularly great design choice (but looks good). I reckon a larger sump would help, more surface area would allow more airflow and Vee sumps seem to be effective on Guzzi engines. It also opens another can of worms though, losing the broadsump and internals etc: etc: Phil is a far better engineer than me, so there's probably something I haven't thought of, besides, it's academic, there isn't any room. I've run both the OEM cooler and the small Setrab currently mounted, seperately and the results were about the same. The Setrab is a little better at cooling, although smaller than the OEM. Running them in parallel wouldn't work as the oil just takes the line of least resistance so the OEM cooler wouldn't do much (larger Delta P across the OEM), therefore it would have to be series. The question is how effective that would be at reducing oil temp and would any gains simply be offset by increased pressure losses, I drop the temp a bit which raises oil pressure but the pipe/cooler losses offset the gains or make things worse (I could also change oil grades from the present 15/50 to a 10/60 oil) It shouldn't be beyond my limited intellect to pipe this, though it won't be a 5 minute job, as space is at a premium. I can also try it with and without the bellypan. @Tomchri yes custom coolers are available, pricey but I could affford it. Until I've an idea of what works and what doesn't I'd rather not shell out what may be a considerable amount for a custom design until I've at least some idea that it might work. The Setrab is most likely better (despite its smaller size) as it runs larger, straighter piping and is well designed in comparison to the OEM. That was my reason for choosing it and why ideally I'd prefer to stay with a well established manufacturer of coolers i.e Setrab or Mocal. Thank you all for your suggestions it's appreciated John

Time for another experiment in oil cooling on the Hi Cam Despite trawling around for a suitable oil cooler that would meet my needs and is bigger than the current small Setrab unit I have installed (way too small for my liking), I cannot find a larger unit that'll fit, due to the width between the headers, rough measurement around 280mm, perhaps a little less at the bends. A lot of coolers are similar dimensions, looking at Mocal and Setrab they're range is virtually identical. Frustrating because I'm beat by by perhaps 5mm with several options. In desperation to lower the oil temperature a litte more, from 105-110C running in clear air. I'm thinking of trying to mount the OEM cooler in series with the Setrab. It may be that the additional restrictions through the hoses and second cooler make things worse pressure wise and I don't gain anything, but thought it would be worth a try. I was wondering which port from the broadsump is feed and which is return from the cooler, same setup on the V11 and the Sporti. Don't think it makes any difference AFAIK, but it would be nice to know which cooler I'm feeding first.

Oh just to add @MartyNZ thanks for the experiment and for sharing the outcome Really appreciate when people take the time to post up insights into the engine in any shape of form John

Not liking adventure style bikes, not wanting to either spend the money or want a Euro 5 (Euro 4 is bad enough) machine and getting too dammed old anyway, I'm definately out. Even if I had the cash and desperately wanted that style of bike I'd hold off anyway. Like nearly all brand new products it'll be 90% developed and the last 10% development will be completed by early adopters. I think this is a crying shame but it's always been the way in my experience I got burned bad enough with the Daytona, where not long after they dropped the price, then released the Dr John Sorry if that sounds cynical, I wish it wasn't my experience, but that's what its been to date

Hi @MartyNZ I'm struggling then, if the pump is reaching rated pressure on the engine, then what's the problem? AFAIK, a postive displacement gear pump's output is only dependent on RPM and suction (sic) pressure, assuming a given fluid viscosity. The pressure/flow realtionship in the system is dicated by the leakage paths & clearances. If the pump was worn, your running pressure would drop. I don't think it's possible to maintain pressure but have lower flow (if that's what you're drving at), I'm not sure. Sort of similar to the Voltage/Current relationship, I'm no pump expert but have done a little experimentation on my HiCam and a bit of research over the years.

@docc can the V11 suffer starter interuptus? Just wondering, seems a common problem on other models especially if the battery isn't quite up to snuff

On that point, years back the gas turbines I ocassionaly worked on used a flow divider to distribute distillate (liquid) fuel to the individual cans on the engine. What happened was fuel was delivered from the pump and filters to the flow divider and the fuel was delivered into a common inlet. The flow divider had had 10 gear pairs which turned due to fuel pressure on the common side and delivered to the cans on the low pressure side. Like 10 guzzi oil pumps arranged back to back in series, all the gears were linked to each other so all had to turn at the same speed. Apparently when they made these things the tolerances were so tight that they simply manufactured the gears measured them and placed them into a stock pile. At assembly gear pairs were then matched from the stock, the tolerances being so tight that they could not just build a set of gears for a divider.

Interesting I've never heard anybody try that experiment Unless something catastrophic had happened to the engine at some point or the mileage was ludicrously high, I'd doubt it, however I've no real idea of what would constitute a worn pump. There has to be gear clerances, but what these are I've no idea. Real test is engine oil pressure, what is start up pressure on cold oil and what's the normal running pressure? My Sport, the nearest I have to a V11, will hit 70psi or so on a cold engine running 15/50 grade oil at 20C ambient, I notice you're using a 5/50 Penrite it may be a little lower, but probably not as much as you'd imagine, if at all. Normal running at 90-100C I get 60psi all day long. If you're getting something similar then I wouldn't have any concerns It'll be interesting to hear other opinions

If I'm reading that right, then it would appear the switch is working. The circuit is simple, so forgive me spelling it out. Pos supply from fuse box to bulb, then bulb to switch, then switch to ground (inside the switch). No pressure, OP switch is closed and path to ground established, circuit made and bulb lights, <5-10psi. Pressure, OP switch opens breaks the circuit, no path to ground, bulb goes out, >10psi The switch has to have a pos supply to it and that path to ground for the bulb to light. You don't have a paddock stand, that's going to make life harder, but why can't you drop the sump on the sidestand? Does the stand get in the way of dropping the sump, as I don't own a V11 I'm unfamiliar with the specifics? With the sump off you should be able to check the filter for double gasketing, then remove the internals that live inside the spacer (4 cap screws to remove). With the internal assembly removed you can check the gasket condition of the sump spacer ensuring no oil way holes are blocked, as I recall the gasket can be installed 180 degrees out, or it could be torn or damaged. With the internals on the bench remove and test (or take it to a garage) to test the relief valve.

Unless you have a fitting that can accept the pressure switch and then attach it to some sort of air or liquid device to exert pressure, no there isn't AFAIK The switch could be tested with a compressor or even a bicyle pump if you had a compatible fitting though, but really as Phil stated it's just easier and cheaper to replace it. You could pull the plugs and injection relay and spin it on the starter without the pressure switch installed, you'll soon know if it's making pressure, but you're probably going to shoot oil everywhere, so don't do it in the front room or next to the wife's new car etc: When the oil switch is out and the lead attached to it is off and not touching anything, turn on the ignition. The light should be out, if it's on then it's grounding elsewhere. If you touch the lead onto the engine casing the light should go on.

Seem to remember back in the Norton Rotary days the displacement measurement is open to question and can be measured different ways, can't be a****d looking it up Is it just me, it looks awfully long, especially swing arm Still a lot of nice tech and very interesting. Greta T's in town at the moment When you're just back from the Dyno after a remap and doorbell goes

You talking about the full kit or slip ons on a 1098 Phil? I had that map in my now sold 1098, later managed to get a Nemisis II ECU cheap. I bought it to separate the ECU from the dash as they are paired and I was thinking about putting on a race dash, which never happened. Anyway I loaded the Nemesis map, which had been mapped by some mob on a dyno in England, for Termi slip ons. It felt like a different engine, I don't know about power but the engine seemed to rev free-er and pull stronger. Into the bargain the coolant temps also went down quite a bit.

Anybody like full on accordian, and has anybody else heard of Regis Gizavo? Unfotunately it's just a pic would have loved to have seen playing this, he passed away some years back

No problem, I prefer the deep sumps to eliminate the spacer which I always felt was a bit of "Michael Mouse Engineering" the downside is they cost quite a bit more. I really like the GG, just think it's a really nice well designed and beautiful item. The MotoSpezial on the other hand has the Vee so the pickup is always covered no matter how stupid (or brave) you get and I believe it cools better too. When I purchased mine a long time back I also opted for the optional site glass, which I love, no more messing with dipsticks. Just wish somebody would make summit for the broadsumps, in the meantime, I'll soldier on with the Roper Plate

Pretty sure they all do the same job, just depends how you like your oil filter oriented. The HMB model has the advantage of taking less vertical space so would suit a full fairing. The Harper on the other hand having the filter pointing downwards allows the filter to be prefilled during an oil change. Personally I prefer the MotoSpezial deep Vee sump and outsider but in that model the filter sits out in front and lot of people dislike it fearing that debris from the front wheel would hole the filter (never happened to me yet). I think Guzziladen (as well as others) stocks them now. There was also a rather nice deep sump made by a Swiss company that located the filter underneath, sort of like the broadsump setup. The difference being in the broadsump it's just hole, in the swiss model the filter was isolated, so if you removed the filter you didn't empty the sump, bit like this one

That's probably the most likely explanation right there

I wonder if it's a spacer, it appears to have some kind of steel band around it and the cylinder/spacer on the rear appears to push the oil filter further back. The cylinder could be an extender to allow access to the filter with the fairing in situ. Not saying it is this type but HMB do a similar type of spacer https://hmb-guzzi.de/Oil-sump-extension-with-front-external-filter

Just still trying to get my head around this Does the bearing spacer in the middle of the wheel slide into the 25mm id bearing on the left reducing its diameter to 20mm and on the right the bearing spacer just butts up against the bearing? I'm thinking there must be logic in it (or is there?) On my planet I'd have thought that the spacer should either butt against the bearings OR slide into both bearings perhaps to tighten up parallel alignment of the bearings. Every day a school day

Surely both bearings should be 20mm int diameter on the runner. If the diameter was 25mm the spindle is going to slide into the bearing runner and will get tight only when either the threads on the LHS fork leg bottom out or the spindle passes through the bearing and gets stopped by the spacer between the wheel bearings inside the wheel itself. If the wheel was reversed then 25mm on the other side wouldn't work either AFAIK. You'd have a 20mm diameter spindle sliding into a bearing race that was 25mm, which would make for interesting handling on the road. I can't think of why the wheel bearing races would have different sizes.....................mind we are talking Guzzi here @80CX100 's idea is clever too

That's a dammed good explanation Chuck, I had not thought of that and it would make a lot of sense, although why they did it doesn't. I checked the 2003 V11 manuals for the Ballabio and the LeMans, no washer shown, but it does show what looks like a stepped spindle and a wheel nut..................So this is something different

No experience with that model either. I ass-ume from your description that the spindle is stepped with the RHS being a larger diameter than the LHS, if I understand it. On the forks I've got with that sort of setup the larger diameter side of the spindle butts against the wheel, pushing it against the spacer which is installed onto the other side. It appears from your pictures that the larger diameter side of the spindle is entering the wheel hub itself allowing the spindle to screw into its threads on the other fork leg until it bottoms. That would also be why the spacer is loose, as the spindle isn't being pulled into tension between the legs, pulling the whole assembly together, clamping the wheel at the same time If that's the case, then spindle is the wrong diameter or the bearing installed has the wrong inner race (which seems extremely unlikely) It could I suppose be one of these botched designs where that was the intention originally but didn't happen and the factory just installed a spacer on the RHS side as well. It would take a lot to surprise most of us familiar with Guzzis produced in and around the millenium @GuzziMoto beat me to it on the expalantion Let's hope somebody with that model shouts up

In the RR Heritage line there is a book by Phillip Ruffles on RR's ventures into producing their Turbofan engines and detailing the history. It's a dry read unless you're VERY geeky. My take was RR were overconfident to say the very least the early engines were a disaster. Shocking to read how bad the early engines were and how badly RR let down their clients. To RR's credit though they didn't leave their customers high and dry but continued doggedly to sort out the problems, however it was an unmitigated mess and took a very long time to produce a good working engine Hooker and many of the old hands were drafted back in to help sort it out, as mentioned in "Not Much of an Engineer" alongwith the Government intervention. I never worked on RR engines, but the GE LM engines, Land and Marine, an aero engine usually driving a generator (but not always) were bad enough. I never did get to grips with the variable bleed valves, IGVs and stator scheduling on the compressor. It might not be rocket science but it comes bloody close. John

Thought you might have been Phil, have you read the RR Heritage book on about the Meteor? Interesting read in many ways, as I remember it turned in the other direction to the Merlin, although thinking about it the Merlin did have "tractor" versions for some aircraft. RR opened up the tolerances on many parts so components which were scrap for the Merlin could be recycled and used in the Meteor. Hives offered it to the Millitary effectively free, the price they paid for each engine was what it cost RR to build one. The British army procurement did their level best to reject it, preferring WWI based aero designs. It started to gain traction (sorry) when they threw one into a tank and completed back to back trials. Of course it wiped the floor with the exisitng engines that the millitary had been using up until that point. Those of us of a certain age might remember John Dodds Merlin engined Rolls Royce which had a big splash in motoring mags many many years ago, I remember rumors that it was in fact a Meteor engine, but the details are all a bit scetchy Off topic again!!! On the supercharger design, Hooker mentioned that having a carb prior to the supercharger resulted in the charge being cooler as it entered the cylinders by a significant amount, I can't remember the exact number, due to evap cooling of the mixture as opposed to straight air being compressed as was the case with the DB 601 and later variants