dlaing

Oh goodie, so I'll be the only kid on the block with one! (If I could afford a second bike.) But I can probably afford the chrome fender, wheels, saddle bags, and lighting. I can do without the two-tone seat. I'd also like the guzzi badge

Am I the only one smitten by the Vintage?

Regarding your leaner plug reading, it is difficult to tell from the photograph if that is all black than it is too rich. If it has tan colors mixed in like image 7, than it MAY be ok. But it does not look tan to me. You can ignore the black on the perimeter, as that is normal, but the blackness of the insulator indicates that it is far too rich. Because of the camera flash it is difficult to photograph, but it looks like mostly black with white ash, which I believe would indicate a combination of too rich and too lean. The look of white may just be the glow of the camera flash. In any case, you may have found your solution by setting the TPS correctly! It was way off, but strangely in the lean direction....weird. Here is an article you may enjoy. http://www.visi.com/~moperfserv/sport_11.htm Keep in mind the Creedon chip in this article is probably several revisions old.

Unless it is in the gas tank, it should not be hard to find. On the V11S it looks like this and is on the right side of the tank

Merry Christmas, indeed!

You can see how much bigger it is, allowing for better cooling. And note the two bolt holes are replaced by large slots.

I suppose either Regulator will allow for roughly the same Amperage if demanded by accessories. But the way a battery demands amperage is different. My concern is that I won't get enough Voltage to keep the Hawker fully charged. I suppose on the positive side, in addition to getting more volts below 2000 RPM, light bulbs, relays, and accessories will last longer. A note for anyone installing the ESR510, you will need a pair of 35mm bolts and some slightly oversized washers. ( I used 30mm bolts, but they are barely long enough.) Longer bolts are needed because the body of the regulator is thicker and larger washers should be used because where the bolts go there is more freeplay to allow for larger bolts, different bolt spacing, etc.

So that seemed to do the trick. This regulator produces voltage at a much lower RPM than the OEM The only downside so far is that peak voltage never gets up to 14V. Perhaps my OEM regulator was not bad. Battery connections are tight, but may need some TLC. In any case, my 30A fuse looks a little dubious.(plastic pulled off metal...) I'll deal with that after Christmas.

Yah, they are intelligent, witty, and so civil that they don't call me a Polly Anna to my face. And for some reason it is a little less American-O-centric. The ones who worship the Queen and or Monty Python, are hilarious! I keep telling all the puffin-hawks(no chicken-hawks over here) to take their angst about democracy threatening Americas dominance in the world, over to the MGNOC-SW forum, but nobody bites the bait. T&A is much better here, because aside from TX Redneck's willy being censored, they let us show photographs over here! The MGNOC-SW boys don't know what they are missing.

I don't know where the regulator is on your bike. The TPS should have smooth consistant readings. It should be plugged in when you check it, which is why people use needle probes, etc. checkout http://home.pacbell.net/guzzi007/tps/TPS.html

Did you get your bike working yet? We want to see that commie red sporti on road again!

Thanks Carl! So, here is plan B Oooops, where I said cap off here and here, just cap off here And I'll be sure to confirm that I am getting a good ground from both the mounting point and the frame.

Is this bike second hand? This level of consumption is clearly beyond mapping issues. Maybe you have the wrong fuel injectors, or somebody tried boring the injectors out, if that is even possible. Or maybe the fuel pressure regulator is stuck closed. Your highway mileage being better seems to imply that if you move fast, it has less chance to dump gas. You might try reading the plug at various RPMs. If the regulator is stuck, it will be richer at low loads and revs, theoretically. Otherwise a faulty sensor is likely. and the air or engine temp sensors would be most likely. Or maybe the TPS. Or maybe the bike is perfectly tuned to run on Ethanol Sorry about the problem.

So here is my plan: Before I damage my bike, does anyone see anything wrong with this plan? The Yellow wires connect to the Yellow wires. The Green wire goes directly to the battery's ground. In addition to grounding at the battery, perhaps I should still tie the green wire into the frame and regulator body just to be well grounded. The Red wire bypasses the fuse and goes directly to the battery. Fuse 3 and the red/green wire becomes obsolete, but could have a future use as an unswitched hot wire for an accessory or the headlights, and it could carry a pretty heavy load. The red/black wire also becomes obsolete, but could have a future use as a switched hot wire, with a light load.

Okay, I think I understand what they want now. If only I could read and comprehend worth a dam. So, if I am reading correctly, when they say no black wire is necessary, they mean that the black wire going to the Red/Black wire is no longer necessary, and that the Red/Black wire can be capped off. Furthermore they want the Red and Green wires to go directly to the battery, do not pass fuses or frame points, and therefore the regulator does not fry if the fuse blows if there is no fuse to blow.

Hey! Just because I am lame at reading does not mean I should be censored. So, what did I mis-read? And by the way....my recollection of every bike rag that I looked at the pictures of and skimmed the words of, is that they have a bias other than MINE....Cycle included. Which is why I have not bought an american bike rag since early 1980 something when I discovered British bike rags to be far superiour....which did not last long and I gave up on rags all together...except when in the waiting room. Maybe you should.... uh let me think about that and get back to you. Maybe you should....tell me what I mis-read.

My charging system has been failing when the engine warms up. I made the possibly false assumption that it is the regulator, based on it being heat related. So I ordered the Electrosport ESR510 from http://www.electrosport.com/shopping_regul...rod_esr510.html also known as www.electrexusa.com Their regulator is made in Argentina and has a good reputation. It arrived by UPS ground less than 24hours after ordering, so off I went to try to hook it up. The problem is that the wires don't all seem to match up. I am 99.9% sure I ordered the right regulator, but I may have to rig something to make this work. I'll try to post a diagram later with the exact problem, but if anyone has had experience with this unit, please let me know. The short version of the story is that there does not seem to be a wire coming out of the regulator to match up with the red/black wire seen in Carl's fine diagram. The OEM regulator has a black wire coming out that goes into the red/black wire. The ESR510 has a Green wire, specified in the instructions to be the ground wire. All the other wires seem to match up fine. The OEM has the following: two yellow that go into two yellow. Two red that go into one Red/Green one white that goes into a lightt blue one black that goes into a red/black and a ground wire hooked to the mounting screw, but not going into the regulator. The ESR510 has two yellow to alternator one red to battery positive one white to alternator warning light and one green to ground I used an OHM meter to see if the green wire was continuous with the regulator housing. It is not. Thanks in advance.

And I'll bet it even has super-charging effects! Like this, but sans filtre!

Like a Dyson® vacuum cleaner?!? No more paper filters and No more power robbing fur balls!

Welcome back to the Forum! Maybe for a disposible motorcycle, as that rag seems to favor. Guzzis average many miles more than the average bike...even with K&Ns. And many of if given a choice between a filter that would give us a 200,000 mile engine vs. a 190,000 mile engine, the choice would be obvious. I don't think anyone can prove the difference in miles, but common sense indicates less crud in, is less crud in. Who knows, maybe the increase in silicates neutralizes the oils acid build-up, and decreases wear But I'll go with less dirt in is better. What about valves, valve seats, valve guides and fuel injectors and throttle slides. My point? Simply that if you want maximum performance the only way to get it is to try everything on a dyno (or copy someone who has) and put the bike together based on model specific, empirical data. Approaching this as religion (brand X good, brand Y bad) will just waste money and time. 71641[/snapback] Dyno evidence of our bike seems to indicate that the open airbox lid allows for the most power production...but there are exceptions. But most of that testing was done before individual cylinder mapping was available, from which Pods may benefit. But the power differences are not great between the options. So, use what you will. I'd like to design a better intake box, but that would just waste time and money, or it could be kicks and grins Glad we can be here for you through cabin fever season.

Excellent! You can be the guinea pig! Let us know what you learn.

I got the BMC number off the box that my FBF airbox lid removal kit came in. I figured the BMC was about the same as a K&N, but if it is good enough for you(Mr. Picky) and Ferrari, that is good enough for me. Still I spent two hours googling unsuccessfully. Why can't I find tests? is K&N suing people for defamation? EDIT I thought trust but verify was your moto, John! Sorry to force you to live by it. I checked my box and it said 164/01 not F45740, so I lied!, sorry. F45740 WAS the FBF part number for just the filter in the 2002 catalog. The current FBF number is F33705 $49.95US The airbox kit with filter is F45700 $79.95 The airbox kit, without filter(for those who already have a BMC or want paper or K&N) F45701 $32.95 The number also appears at Guzzitech.com, which may be where I got the number from. Anyway if you need the dimensions, the BMC is listed at 134 x 224mm

My planned method is very similar to Brian's. Rather than simply debating whether or not it is doable, perhaps we could figure out how to make it doable. I am getting an immense kick out of making subtle changes to the map and road testing the effects. I may be losing my mind since I am having dreams of maps in my head. I now have the bike down to no pinging on 89 Octane. The next step is 87 Octane. Weather conditions vary the results, so I want to make sure my map is not pinging. I plan on getting a WBO2 sensor to optimize it better than my natural senses can. The greatest limitation of my senses is the inability to differentiate right/left cylinder differences. I think the WBO2 will help with that. Also, if map points show numbers outside the range of, oh say, 12.8/1 to 13.8/1, it will be a red flag to more closely scrutinize what is happening at those map points. The ECU thread (that Brian started) certainly showed that exhaust oxygen readings do not correllate accurately with optimal true A/F. WBO2 sensors, on the other hand, are a little different than other oxygen sensors. I don't understand exactly how they work, but from what I gather, they compare the ratio of oxygen in the exhaust gas to the oxygen in the air. Because it can only do this at a narrow lambda range, the sensor automatically adjust the center of the range point, depending on how much H and CO is available to be oxidized from pumping in a measure of atomospheric air. I apologise if that is totally wrong, but I can't find a good definition of how it works, other than this pretty technical piece: http://www.megasquirt.info/PWC/LSU4.htm So, I am hoping that all the four wheel squids playing with WBO2 controllers are getting useful data, and that we can too. I suspect there will be readings that mislead. I'd love to see Derek monitor WBO2 readings parallel with his O2 readings and CO readings, to see if the WBO2 follows more in line with the more useful CO readings.

Would you care to site the tests for BMC vs. brand X,Y, and Z? I'd like to say cheers to BFG's keep a lid on it philosophy and mtiberio's educational post regarding valve guides. As well as to all the other holiday revelers of all sorts of opinions

I was surprised that the UNI did so bad in these tests. I remember reading an independent study that comapared UNI K&N and paper, and the K&N let the most air and dirt flow. The paper blocked the most dirt, but some dirt passed early on because pores werent closed, and much later on, after the filter was saturated with dirt. The UNI initially blocked more air, but after a month of service flowed better than the paper after a month. I recall that the UNI kept the most dirt out of the engine and flowed very well for about a year. I suppose eventually the dirt will build up and get sucked into the engine, as it did in the Test that Ratchet linked us to. My other potential plan is to put a UNI prefilter over my BMC