swooshdave Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Great work gloves in that shot, unlined leather for less than 20$ Total respect Leave the wallet at home Save a ton And those gloves won't do shit in a crash. not only will the leather disintegrate they may fly off. Note do they have any padding or protection. I like my hands too much to go cheap with the gloves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docc Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 My RoadCrafter and gear weigh, like, 25 pounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 I once had a pair of "Elkskin Ropers" that I thought were pretty protective. After a little unscheduled slide on chip and seal, the only injury I had was where a knuckle was ground off a little from the glove burning through. I won't wear gloves without hard knuckle protection any more. Still use the ropers on the lawn mower.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRD Posted January 12, 2018 Author Share Posted January 12, 2018 "After a little unscheduled slide on chip and seal, the only injury I had was where a knuckle was ground off a little from the glove burning through" Shaving grams instead of pounds eh Chuck? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gmc28 Posted January 12, 2018 Share Posted January 12, 2018 Or go all out and ride naked.... light weight and less wind resistance. I haven’t yet had the cans off this bike, but that was the monster weight savings on other bikes, where going after market (may or may not) improves looks, sound, and weight. I think it was a 12 lb savings on the ST4, iirc? That seems significant. After that it seems like nickel-dime changes, unless it’s rotating weight. And even for the rotating weight thing I’m just parroting what others have said (here and elsewhere), except that it does seem to be noticeable on things like mountain bikes, where small rotating weight gains can be felt by the chump trying to pedal... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footgoose Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Member 'stewgnu' posted this link http://www.returnofthecaferacers.com/2017/03/motoguzzi-v11-caferacer.htmlin the "interesting Guzzi builds" thread. .. http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20246&page=2&do=findComment&comment=229223 I'm dragging it over here because the build concentrates on weight savings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Member 'stewgnu' posted this link http://www.returnofthecaferacers.com/2017/03/motoguzzi-v11-caferacer.htmlin the "interesting Guzzi builds" thread. .. http://www.v11lemans.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=20246&page=2&do=findComment&comment=229223 I'm dragging it over here because the build concentrates on weight savings. It's too early in the morning to be scared like that. I clicked on it and saw this "thing" looking at me. I do not like it, Sam I am. I think I'll go fix some eggs and ham.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scud Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 I like the look of that build (although I still prefer the original design). As a rider, I would like to at least have a rear fender and air filters. I suppose that's not needed if you only go to cafes on nice days. On the weight savings, they said it was a top priority, but didn't report the net weight savings... so it looks lighter, but what is the actual weight? Also interesting that they didn't try to cut weight on the rear wheel and drive, with the possible exception of the reaction rod that goes from frame to top of final drive. No lightweight brake rotors... no lightweight wheels. I wonder how much weight carburetion saves vs fuel injection? The bike no longer has the fuel pump, ecu, some sensors, the airbox, and there would be less fuel line and less wiring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
68C Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 I do not think the design has anything to do with weight saving, merely the usual showcase for their admittedly excellent custom engineering. Too many heavy bits on show that could easily have been made lighter. Braided steel oil lines, thick alloy alternator cover and unecessary alloy plate on the tank,there is a lot more you can spot. Footgoose, this post should be moved back as it is not about lightweight just another custom bike. Probably built up from a wreck so all new bodywork needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docc Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 [The post wasn't moved, just the links posted here, as well, for discussion.] I get that a lot of folks find the V11 heavy. Before the Sport, I had caféd a first year GoldWing. It was a fun and interesting project, but weighed 650 pounds. I wouldn't say that makes the Sport feel like a "lightweight" , but more like "fighting weight" by comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swooshdave Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Well, in comparison a dry BMW GS1200 weighs less than a V11 Sport... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
footgoose Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 The V11 is kind of a heavy bike. It doesn't bother me. I think MG did a pretty good job keeping it light as possible, given the cost/market/profit parameters. I'm happy with it. The custom's article premise is false, or at least, way overstated. As said by 68c, it's about a custom bike, and like so many "featured" customs, is an advert about the abilities of the builder. I think the article has merit in this thread, to show the lengths one must go to, to significantly reduce weight. Even if he didn't complete the said objective. I like the bike in question, but what I like about it has little to do with it's weight. As the author states, it's a "cool cafe" but converted from a clunker??...Hardly 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewgnu Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Agreed. I do think that while the v11 is on the heavy side, it handles really nicely. I have no complaints! I’ve swapped bikes whilst touring with my mate + his triumph speed four a couple of times, which was lauded as being a superb handling machine- the guzz is absolutely fine, even in that company, imho. Reckon if i was serious about losing weight i’d save up (a lot!) and swap the wheels for marvics or dymags. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Seriously, the V11S is not a "sport" bike, and that's a good thing, IMHO. It's a Sport touring bike. Comfortable enough to ride to the twisty bits, have a good time while there, and ride back. Most "Sport" bikes are not particularly good at that. Gimme some good eye talian road huggin weight when I'm out on the interstate. A V11S, especially an Ohlins bike is more than "good enough" in the mountains. Again, IMHO, it would be impossible to get it down to sport bike weight. It's just too robust. I don't have a problem with that. It's my favorite all around bike of all time. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowRyter Posted January 13, 2018 Share Posted January 13, 2018 Handling on a V11 is a lot like horsepower, it has more of both than I have nerve. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now