BrianG

There's another thread here, where the sound got isolated to the rear hub stabilizer bushing as it either loaded or unloaded.

Just in case you were NOT joking, Mike. That filter passes 100's of times more fuel than the bike burns, as it is recirculated over and over............ through the return line, past the regulator and round and round.

Todd: Is this appropriate for an inline, high pressure-side application?

What about a tiny one like the one that is a part of the "in-tank" pump in the newer V-11's? Is there also a larger in-line one, downstream?

In my attempt to relocate the fuel pump on my V-11 Sport, I have been looking for a smaller fuel filter. There are many automotive "fuel filters" of appropriate size, but they are not designated as specifically "Fuel Injection" type. I wonder: Are non-F.I. fuel filters inappropriate for locating in the high-pressure side of the F.I. system? Would it be sufficient to place one of these non-F.I. filters right in front of the fuel pump and forget having one in the high-pressure side?

From what I've heard of Luigi

And a nice BIG hello!! from beautiful downtown Edmonton, Alberta, Canada! I've figured out how to out-run those persistent Boys in Blue!! It's called a Comanche 260..............

OK, the last variable that I'm uncertain about is that blue aluminum "nut" on the damper rod. Since it moves quite a bit on the damper rod, is it just a jam-nut to set against the fork cap, or is it for spring preload? I think it's certainly usable for unloading the spring for installation, and then might one be able to get some proload out of it as well??

In that icon of modern technology, the iron small block Chev engine, one of the crankshaft main bearings has flanges that ride on the cheeks of one of the crank throws, to define axial free play. It's simple, and elegant. I wonder why it wasn't considered in this far more sophisticated design.

Ratchethack: That's great information, and I'll reference the web-site. As usual, Max's reply, regarding what to use, was "concise", and is as follows: "Light 125/150. Fork oil is cheap crap, and fork fluid is a precision hydraulic damping fluid." Seems pretty straight forward!

Um.... I'm not quite sure what you are meaning by the air being "contained in the cartridges", but it's the air space above the oil in the fork tube. If you recall my previous blathering, the "measurement" used to define the amount of oil is taken with the tube collapsed in the fork, but absent the spring. I think the "absent the spring" part is to make measuring easier. Anyway, the measured air-space (less the oil displacement of the spring which we'll ignore for the purposes of this discussion) defines the volume of the "working air spring" at full stroke compression. People have been bantying around 110mm for that number. If you look in there when you have the oil level set and you extend the fork to the free sag point, that defines the "0-value" air spring volume, which is about 100 mm added to the compressed space (given 20mm free sag, out of 120 mm total travel). So that means that we are talking about 110 mm measured air-space at compression + 100mm of tube extension at the free-sag point, for a near 2:1 compression ratio, meaning 2 atmospheres, or roughly 30 lbs of pressure at full compression. Perhaps the seals can/do tolerate that much pressure momentarily. I do know that they blow oil like a bugger when they leak! Anyway, if I have confused the air-spring situation sufficiently, it's only payback for you screwing up my idea about the fork-oil. I was happily going to use Golden Spectro Cartridge Fork Fluid, but now that seems wrong. I'll pop Max the question quoting the Guzzi Service Manual info and see what he suggests. This is gonna hurt!

Ratchethack, the current generation of forks, generally known as cartridge forks, as well as some of the older type, do use the air-space as a continuously variable overlaying spring to suppliment the main suspension spring. Varying the volume of that airspace alters the rate of rise of the airspring suppliment, to the point of hydraulic lock if sufficient space isn't available for full fork travel. Varying this airspace by 5 mm creates a noticable difference in ride quality, to a racer. I have not noticed much difference with less than 10mm change, but that much is definitely notable. FYI, the note I got from Max this morning suggested that "Fork Oil" is not appropriate for most cartridge forks. He suggests specifically identified, synthetic "Cartirdge Suspension hydraulic oil" as made by Spectro and others. They use 2.5 wt and 5 wt. I guess we need to check the specs on the Guzzi recommended oil. I suspect that I'm going to 5 wt in any case. vkerrigan, what have you got for front sag numbers now? Free and loaded, please?

No problem on the info. The more experience I can tap, the better!! I'm about 220 lb in full gear. I like the twisty asphalt, but ride too much slab to call myself a dedicated Sport Rider. I guess I'm a Sport Touring type. My most recent ride is a CBR 900RR that has the full Traxxion fork revalve/spring and Penske shock treatment, with Heli-bars and a Corbin seat......... which should be somewhat revealing! One up, sometimes with Givi luggage, often too fast, and rarely to track-days (to get my ass whipped by my 20 yr old son). Currently on Michelin Pilot Road's, but LOVE the Pirelli Diablo's on the 'blade! Most manufacturers spec fork oil capacity in terms of "remaining airspace" as measured from the surface of the oil, to the top of the collapsed fork tube, absent the spring. This is apparently so that the critical issue, which is the airspace-spring, is consistent and reproduceable regardless of the completeness of the draining process, which apparently can be challenging on some forks. This is the first step in the optimization of this suspension. Max says it's a good enough fork if it's set up right. My suspension philosophy is informed by Max's, being; the best suspension is the one that best keeps the rubber on the road. That means the more compliant, the better. Max calls it "the cushy ride". This makes sense to me, and is comfortable on the road, and sucessful on the track. Given proper springing (15-25% Free Sag and 25-35% Loaded Sag) enough rebound damping to kill the second bounce cycle, and little to no compression damping, will be the ideal, front and back. The rear suspension is next. Typical Jap suspension is overly soft front springs and overly firm back spring. I'm not sure if this is the Guzzi norm, but the goals for the back will be the same as the front. Next winter's project, as I have still got a PC III to install, and a rear fender to excise. Your thoughts??

Ok.... got the springs from Max. I opted for a 1.10 set. Now, what weight oil and how much?? Yes, I see the service manual says 400 cc's but I'd like the current parameter of "oil level" better. Anyone got this number?

I'd be interested..... particularly in the eliminator part.

I beez thinkin' this frickin' thing won't screw back together!! WTF!!

OK, what maroon designed the tank outlets on the 2000 V11 Sport? The regulator's flanged outlet (inlet) is left hand threaded! while the regulator itself is right hand threaded! The fuel tap's flanged outlet is right hand threaded while the tap is left hand threaded! Is this bizzare? My query is actually around the issue of replacing the regulator's flanged tank outlet fitting. The newer model years show the same part number for both, fuel tap and regulator, being the same as on the fuel-tap side of the 2000 model year unit (right hand threaded). I cannot find a reference to the "union nut" on the newer one for the regulator, as found on the 2000 m/y. Is there one? Is it right-hand threaded on both sides?

I have been trying to be proactive in this vapor-lock issue while there is still ssnow on the ground up here! On reading every thread that I can find, I like the idea of moving the fuel pump onto the top of the frame. This leaves the issue of the fuel filter, because it's pretty large. Looking at the thread on replacing the whole fuel-tank with one with the fuel pump package inside, I noticed that the integral fuel filter is relatively tiny! What might be the consideration in replacing the original large one with a smaller one (like the integral one), to avoid the relocation issue altogether by placing it immediately proximal to the fuel pump, on top of the frame??

I'm the guy! It's perfect for where I want to take my 2000 Sport!! e-mail on the way!

Mine has the filter on top and the pump on the left side of the spine. Does the in-tank-pump fuel tank fit the earlier models?

Has anyone relocated the V11 fuel pump without removing the air box? To where? Pics??

Different tools for different jobs. The 'blade is great for tight twisties or the occasional foray to the track. The Sport is great for longer sporty trips, and the 928 is the best tool for hauling the wife quickly down the slab!

Like I got room to talk!!

Carl! Ya gotta find work!!

Can someone with a wiring diagram for the 2000 Sport take a look and see if the signal-light cancel is triggered by a ground pulse or a B+ pulse? Or is it simply a mechanical dis-engage for the switch? Thanks!