GuzziMoto

Rear suspension travel should be around 128mm. So, 20 - 30 % of that. For doccs 25% it would be 32mm of sag with you on the bike from fully extended.

Yeah, I respect his talent but not the man. He showed everyone who he is, and I lost pretty much all respect for him as a person with his behavior. Another factor is, while he is very fast he is also lacking in respect for others on track with him. He has a tendency to hit others. Sometimes it is because he is not fully in control of his bike, other times he is fully in control but chooses to make contact on the way by even though there may be enough room to do so without contact. I think he feels that contact like that will intimidate others so next time they will give him more room. Dale Earnhardt did the same thing in NASCAR. And I was not a fan of his, either. One possible outcome of Marc being on a faster bike is more people may end up on the ground. I hope not, I hope he is past that sort of riding. But I will believe it when I see it.

I don't think it is very likely that Marc goes back to Honda, only pointing out that it is possible. I did not come up with that idea, I am only repeating what others have speculated. Him leaving Honda might have been the kick required to get Honda to develop their bike. It really isn't that far off, Unfortunately, the field is so close that a bike that is half a second to a second off is no where. He may stay where he is at Ducati, either on the same team or move to another Ducati team. But it is important to remember that he chose to only sign for one year. While perhaps he had an eye towards the factory Ducati team at the end of that one year, it seems unlikely they would sign him. Maybe he could get a seat at a different Ducati team, maybe even a seat at Pramac running a current spec Ducati. But a seat on the factory Ducati team seems unlikely. That said, you never know. He could also go somewhere else, like KTM or Aprilia. I would love to see him on either of those. Frankly, Ducati needs Marc at another team to give them some credibility when they win. I think the deal with Rea demonstrates the risks of going to a different brand bike. Much as Marc is struggling somewhat to adapt to the Ducati from the Honda, Rea is struggling to adapt to the Yamaha after years on the Kawasaki. Rea didn't forget how to go fast, but going fast is a combination of rider and bike. If the rider and the bike don't find that happy point the speed isn't there. Rea is struggling more then Marc is, but neither has found that happy point yet. I would think both will find it, but it is possible that one or both of them never do. I won't say I disagree with your take on what Marc did in 2015, but I suspect there was more to it then that. Those two don't like each other. It was great to see Crazy Joe Iannone do well his first race in WSBK. I was pretty sure he would. He is talented, more talented then Bautista in my opinion. That said, Bautista did not do bad. He had a bad race 1, but on Sunday he did better. If he would stop whining about carrying a little extra weight (he still has a noticeable weight advantage over most everyone else) and just focus on his riding it might help. That said, I don't rate him nearly as high as I rate Iannone.

Yeah, Fabio was demanding more power while Cal Crutchlow (their test rider) was saying they have enough power but they can't get their power to the ground. It seems Cal was at least partially right, adding even more power didn't help their pace. They just have more grip issues then before while having higher speeds down the straights. That might work at some tracks, but mostly not. They lack both in electronics to manage their grip and physical chassis to get that grip. Adding more power to a chassis that already has more power then it can use is usually a waste of time. I would give Marc time to adapt to the Ducati before worrying about his next seat. He might end up back at Honda for all we know.

That literally is what makes the year of a motorcycle in Europe "Fluid". What "Fluid" means in this context is the year a vehicle is titled / registered as can vary depending on when it is actually titled / registered. A 2002 Moto Guzzi could be titled / registered as a 2003, even a 2004, or later, Moto Guzzi because of when it was sold / titled / registered. So, a motorcycle made for the 2002 model year is not always titled / registered as a 2002 motorcycle in Europe. That they have specific rules governing the process doesn't make it not fluid. In fact, the rules that apply across Europe on this are what makes the year of a motorcycle in Europe "Fluid". A 2002 motorcycle in the US is pretty much always titled / registered as a 2002 motorcycle in the US, regardless of when it is sold. Here in the US, vehicles are made for a specific year, and have to meet the requirements for that year. When they are actually sold doesn't generally factor into it. If the standards change, only vehicles built for the newer standards have to meet the newer standards. It isn't a matter of which way is better, it isn't a competition. But I can say I am glad we do it the way we do it. It makes it easier when you are buying parts. If your Moto Guzzi is a 2002 V11 Sport you just need to buy parts that fit a 2002 V11 Sport. This whole debacle with figuring out which forks a V11 Sport has highlights how having a fixed model year makes it easier to figure out what will fit and what won't. With Moto Guzzi there is still some room for error, they aren't always 100% about building their bikes with the correct parts. With another brand like a Honda, though, it would be 100% dead on. A 2002 Honda Thingamajig would always use the exact same parts as any other 2002 Honda Thingamajig. Where as a 2003 Honda Thingamajig would use 2003 Honda Thingamajig parts. But if you bought your 2002 Honda Thingamajig in 2003 in Europe and was titled / registered as a 2003 Honda Thingamajig you would have to know that and buy parts for a 2002 Honda Thingamajig even though yours is titled / registered as a 2003.

I think there have been a few people like that in motorcycling over my lifetime. People who both made amazing contributions to the sport and were also straight up good people. People like John Britten, Erik Buell, and Dr John. I am happy to have met two of those three. And owned motorcycles created by two of the three as well (but not the same two as the first example).

Yeah, as they say "The more things change the more they stay the same". From what I hear from Marc, he is struggling to adapt. But even "struggling" he is still fast and not far off the top. He was what, under 4 tenths from the top? Not sure that is sandbagging. But time will tell. Raul Fernandez seemed to be the standout kid in this round of testing. He was 5th fastest. And second fastest Ape. Interesting, the top 6 were 3 Ducs and 3 Apes. Of course, the top 10 were 6 Ducatis, 3 Apes, and a KTM. So Ducati still has the advantage of numbers and likely the best bike. I did see a top speed chart and it seemed to show that the Yamaha was only a click or two down from the fastest top speeds and better then many. So it seems Yamaha has resolved their speed deficit but are still slow. Maybe Fabio was wrong to focus so much on top speed. But time will tell (again).

Or you can convert your V11 to handlebars. We did that to my wifes V11, using Ballabio clamps and bars. Her stock top triple clamp had the bosses for the handlebar clamps, all I had to do was drill them out and add the handlebar clamps. We used Ballabio clamps and bars, but you don't need to use MG parts. About any bar clamps and bars can work. Depending on how far up you move the bars you may need longer cables and lines. I was able to carefully re-route the stock lines and make them work, but buying longer lines is a better option if required. And longer cables and lines are available since some V11's came from the factory with handle bars or high rise bars.

The dipstick would be more important then adding as much oil as the specs say to add in my opinion. The dipstick is telling you how high physically the oil level is in the sump. That is the more important factor here. You may want to add a Roper plate for your oil sump, it helps control the oil in the sump and keeps it from sloshing away from the oil pickup. There is info on here about them. Also, the dip stick can be tricky to read. In some cases I have drilled holes in the dip stick to make it easier to read. Small (1/16") holes make it easier to see where the oil level is. Then there is the debate of screwing the dip stick in vs just putting it back in the hole. Over filling the sump can lead to oil being blown out the breather. That is annoying. I would rather be slightly lower then perfect vs over filled.

I should add, I prefer the open hole in the side plates the older versions like the Daytona have. The newer versions are prettier, but I think the slicker casting of the new versions coupled with the open hole of the original Daytona version would be sweet. Also, the open design of the Daytona version allows you to slide a tube through the frame and securely support the rear of the frame with it. You can't do that with the newer versions. Funny, you can do that with a Griso frame. It also has an open hole through the frame.

Just poking you, docc. Seriously, I love the MGS-01, but there is an elegance to the side plates on the Daytona and its kin. The MGS-01 doesn't use the side plates, which gives the bike a very different look. Not good or bad, just different.

Mmmmm, porkchops...... ;-)

Not the same thing, but my '93 Daytona has a GSXR front end, the forks, wheel, and brakes. They are fairly easy to find used, and can be made to work really well. It lacks the panache of the Aprilia parts, but it works better then the original set up.

I am sad to hear of Dr Johns passing. Life is often too short. Death does not wait for you to be ready. That Dr John did not invent the spine frame doesn't mean what Dr John did was any less impressive. He also did not invent the internal combustion engine. Everything people are doing nowadays is on the backs of those who came before. Arguably Tony Foale didn't "invent" the spine frame either, as bikes have used spine frames before he "invented" it. A better way of phrasing it might be that Tony Foale helped develop the spine frame that we know. The Guzzi sideways V twin is a natural fit for a spine frame.

I find the year of a motorcycle is more fluid in Europe then it is here in the US. In the US a bike that is a 2002 model is nearly always sold as a 2002 model, even if it is not sold until 2003, or even 2004 or 2005. It is titled when it is sold, but here a bike is always titled as the year it was built for. I am no expert, but it seems in much of Europe a 2002 bike can be titled as a 2003 if that is when it is sold. I often have bought leftover models, sometimes you can get a better deal on them. That said, I do think that Guzzi has always been fluid about the way it transitions new changes into the line. They seem to use the parts they have on hand to build the bikes. If the parts on hand change, they use the new parts. Look at the way roller tappets became the tappet for a CARC motor. It just quietly happened part way through a model year. But most of the changes are much more subtle and minor. They seem to simply run out of a part and when the order new ones the new parts may not be the same.

Adding 1" of preload to the front forks is a massive change to preload, and would reduce sag by about an inch. That would probably be too much. Standard sag with the rider on the bike for a V11 Sport is around an inch to an inch and a half. So reducing sag by an inch is probably too big a change. Usually you add preload in much smaller amounts. If you wish to reduce sag by 1/4" you only need to add 1/4" of preload. If you want to reduce sag by 1/2" you would add 1/2" of preload. It should be a 1 to 1 ratio between preload and sag. As mentioned elsewhere on here, if you measure your bikes sag with you on it and measure how much it sags just under its own weight (both measured based on fully extended suspension) and compare the two values that should tell you both if your preload is right but also once preload is right it tells you whether your springs are too soft, too stiff, or just right. Once preload is to where you have around 25 - 30 percent sag with you on the bike you should have around 10 percent sag just from the weight of the bike. There is some wiggle room there for rider preference, I prefer less sag when I am on the bike, some prefer more for a softer ride. The spring rates don't change because of your sag, but the spring rates required to get sag at 25 percent vs 30 percent make the difference. But measure your sag both just the weight of the bike and with you on the bike and compare. What preload affects is ride height when you are riding down the road. It does not change spring rate, it does not make the springs stiffer or softer. It is mainly about getting the suspension in the correct operating range for proper suspension motion. As mentioned, if you do have the one version of forks that Andreani make a cartridge for that might be what you want to go with if you aren't happy with stock.

There are two different things you can be doing, one is adding preload, which doesn't make the spring stiffer and is what you referred to. But what you describe doing is cutting the springs to make them stiffer and then replacing the length of spring you cut out to keep the preload the same. That does make the spring stiffer. That is something we would do in the old days when we could not afford to buy the correct springs, or in some cases where the correct springs were not available. I really don't recommend doing that, but technically it can work. If you are going to do that I would probably do it 1 inch or less at a time. If you measure the length of the spring and then cut out, say, 5% of the total length of the spring and replace it with a spacer the length of the spring you cut out that should make the spring roughly 5% stiffer. The big drawback to cutting springs to make them stiffer is you loose the proper end to the spring that allows the end to rotate smoothly on the surface it rides on. That can be even more of an issue if the surface it is riding on is a PVC spacer. It may not slide well on that. I always thought the best way to do that would be to leave the ends and cut out a section of the spring in the middle of the spring and replace it with the matching spacer. But I never actually tried that. Doing it that way would preserve the proper ends on the spring. But it means cutting the spring twice instead of once. Before I ever got to try it I started making enough money for a living that I could buy the proper springs so I never needed to try the middle cut idea. But springs should be available for the V11 at a reasonable cost. I would go that route over cutting your springs to make them stiffer. Also, have you properly measured your sag and determined how much you have? That would be step 1. Just making your springs stiffer by cutting them without first knowing how much sag you have would be a shot in the dark. Springs are a lot cheaper then a full replacement cartridge. But knowing that you need new springs and whether they need to be softer or stiffer then what you have now would be a matter of measuring your current sag first. Instructions on how to measure sag are on here if you need. Also, it sounds like you have the one version of forks that Andreani actually makes replacement cartridge's for. Black 40mm forks with compression on one leg and rebound on the other, if I understood you correctly.

Are the upper tubes black? Or silver? The silver ones are the ones that have the two bleed holes. Others may have two bleed holes, I don't know. But the first gen silver Marzocchis have two bleed holes that prevent the piston in the cartridge from doing anything until the piston is past them. If they are black, and the lowers 40mm, they may be the version that the Andreani cartridges fit. If they are black but the lowers are 43mm, I don't think the Andreani cartridges will fit.

As has been mentioned, there are at least two different versions of Marzocchi forks on V11 Sports. I think there are 3 versions. They don't seem to understand this, and while they do make a cartridge kit that fits one of the versions they advertise it as fitting all versions. If you have the version of Marzocchi forks that their kit fits, I think it is the black forks with 40mm tubes (but don't quote me on that), you are good to go. But if you don't have that version of Marzocchi forks you will end up like Lucky Phil. SOL. Also, do you have the early forks that have the two bypass holes in the cartridge tube? If so, you need to block at least one of those two holes off to get any meaningful dampening from the forks for compression.

Yeah, I think it was four guys (all Ducati's) under the lap record. I think AP on the Ape was fifth, but I could be mis-remembering. Testing often doesn't mean too much, that is the point of testing. Teams with more ground to make up tend to spend more time during testing actually testing different things, so their times can be misleading. But I do expect with the massive concessions given to Honda and Yamaha they will be there by the end of this season. Marc Marquez showed he was certainly close enough to the front on the Ducati. But he also showed that he is not likely to be the dominant force he has been in the past on the Honda. Even if he is winning, it will likely be a closer race as he will be on basically the same machine as half the other front runners where as in the past he was on a different bike with different characteristics. Also, times have changed, and the competition is super tight in lap times. Be 4 or 5 tenths off and you may not be in Q2.

That seems like a better technical video, with a better explanation of secondary forces with regard to engine balance. But he still missed one factor in secondary balance forces, the counterbalance weight on the crank. It is easier to think about this if you start by using a single cylinder engine as a baseline. Even a single cylinder engine has primary and secondary balance forces.

To my knowledge, yes. The TRX Yamaha made, back in the mid 90's was the first mainstream offset crank parallel twin. Other brands like Honda had made offset cranks work for V twins, allowing them to get less vibration from narrow angle V twins. But the TRX was the first mainstream offset crank parallel twin as far as I know. The same engine also went into the TDM 850, which was already on sale with a 360 crank parallel twin. The 270 parallel twin was pretty much the 360 engine with a 270 crank and matching cams. I seem to recall there was a more cafe version of the TRX that never came here, but I could be wrong. I just seem to recall seeing a picture of one in white with a red trellis frame that was beautiful but never came to the USA. I wanted it. So, the offset crank parallel twin has been around for near 3 decades. But it is surging in popularity right now. After Yamaha did it, there was really no one else for a long time. Yamaha took the same basic tech and made the Cross Plane R1 motor, but there wasn't much going on with Parallel twins for years. Everyone wanted a V twin despite the parallel twins better engine packaging. The sideways V twin on a Guzzi works well, but a proper 90 degree V twin that isn't sideways is very hard to properly fit in a compact motorcycle chassis. It clearly can be done, but it isn't always done right (see the TLR).

Very nice bike. It makes my naked Daytona look pedestrian. Very nice.

The last few seasons have been pretty exciting in MotoGP. Ever since the fall of Marc Marquez it has been good exciting racing in MotoGP. The only downside is here in the US we have reduced TV coverage of MotoGP. I would like to see aero restrictions and the adjustable ride height devices banned. They have hurt the racing a little. I suspect with the concessions made for Yamaha and Honda they will be back in the mix before this season is over. They really bent over backwards for Yamaha and Honda.

Toprak is taking to the BMW real well. That is true. At this point the only concern left for BMW is can they manage tire life. That has historically been a weak point for them. I am fine with the weight rule they implemented this year. I think it is the least they could do, and think that partially taking away Bautista's weight advantage only puts him closer to where his talent would have put him without his weight advantage. And I would like to see a similar rule in MotoGP. They already have combined minimum weight for Moto3 and Moto2, so it already is in the series. In my opinion a combined minimum weight only makes things even, it takes away the advantage a lighter rider has with just a minimum weight for the bike. With out the combined minimum rule a lighter rider has several advantages, including a better power to weight ratio and better fuel economy (which is actually really important when they limit how much fuel you can use). It also means better tire life, and less load on the brakes. If a lighter racer can't run as fast as a heavier racer with a combined minimum weight he just isn't as good as the heavier racer and was only relying on his advantages from being lighter.