New 20 ounce tumblers available now! Forum donation credit with purchase. https://www.wildguzzi.com/Products/products.htm#Tumbler
I am sure I would like it (a street-bike version), but I might want more power. The 1200 was a great motor, and I am sure I would like the 1400 as well, but 850cc seems a bit small to me.Still, my Ducati ST2 had only a 944cc motor with about 83 hp, and it had plenty of power, even for two-up...
An ST-2 makes about 83 HP at the rear wheel, and is no feather weight. I agree that's fine for two up. 65 RWHP seems more achievable for the Guzzi and I'd guess with some certainty that the 80HP claim is at the crankshaft, but time will tell. The Ducati engine is a 944 cc overhead cam desmo with water cooled heads. My SV650 (DOHC 4V per cylinder) makes 68 RWHP and will haul 275 lbs of people without trouble - but is not ideally suited to it, feeling a bit tightly wound at 75 mph two up. It's a roughly 130 mph motorcycle. My R100GS makes far less power (40s at the rear wheel) and can't go nearly that fast but is better doing the same two-up job... larger displacement and lower RPM play a role, not just power. It's just my POV but I think if Piaggio has actually done the best job that's possible to develop the 850 cc small block it'll do the two up touring job comfortably... but it'll need to be a really good detail reengineering job relative to the engine they've been selling.
It looks nice but I still don’t believe it’ll have 80hp. I think it will be about 65hp at the wheel, at most.
The new KTM 790Duke (799cc water-cooled parallel twin) is listed at 105 hp and 65 ft-lbs torque. The air-cooled V85 motor will not match those power figures, but Guzzi's claim of 80hp does not seem unreasonable using new technology, such as titanium intake valves. Ducati has produced 80+ hp in the past from air-cooled engines of similar displacement. Let's wait and see what the actual real-world test data say before dismissing Guzzi's claims.
Still looks like a volcanic eruption of boiling arse!
Cheese and crackers! What the heck should it look like then? That isn't the "retro" look you despise so much. Is it supposed to have "Bill the Cat" headlights like a BMW, or like any one of the Japanese bikes with it's pointy bug-torso arse sticking up toward the sky? Look like a Triumph or KTM? Maybe an Aprilia? One thing is for sure - I definitely would not ever want to be in the design dept. of any motorcycle company, because no matter what your design looks like, there's always going to be someone who thinks it looks like a "volcanic eruption of boiling arse".
My 79 lemans makes 63 rwhp with a b10 cam and 40mm carbs, I would think that 40 years later I could expect at least 70 at the wheel
I'm confused, my 20 year old air cooled Centauro dynoed 92 at the rear wheel with it's 1000cc. I'd like to think in 20 years of continuing refinement a 2 valve could produce decent numbers.
All due respect...but the Centauro was rated 95 at the crank. The 1200 Sport was also rated 95 at the crank and those typically showed low 80's on a dyno. I don't know why a Centauro would only lose 3-4% from the crank to the wheel when 15% is what most Guzzi's have for drivetrain loss.
Peter? If you're going to make a statement at least have the courage to stand by it!
Why? The laws of physics haven't changed?