The way back machine - 8v vs 2v/cyl comparison

[bad Chad]

Must give NP credit for sighting his source!   And no knock against you NP, but I don't buy their results.   They report the single disc Kaw stopped in a 115 feet!!!  NO way, just didn't happen.   

[jlburgess]

I'd guess they were basing 60 mph stopping tests on indicated speed back then.  Was probably really going 52. 

[oldbike54]

Must give NP credit for sighting his source!   And no knock against you NP, but I don't buy their results.   They report the single disc Kaw stopped in a 115 feet!!!  NO way, just didn't happen.

 Aw c'mon Chad , you mean that a single disc 1970's MC can't stop as fast as a 2015 Tuono ?
Look , I know what some of the period tests claimed , but the testing was not very scientific . They would run the bikes up to an indicated 60 MPH , (not verified) and crank up the brakes . In fact , most of the time the bike was doing maybe 53 MPH , that greatly distorted the figures . Now the speeds are either GPS or radar gun verified . It is always weird to ride with someone that has GPS and find out how optimistic my old beemer speedo is .

  Dusty

[bad Chad]

You called it Dusty.  Stopping in a 117 feet from 60mph is a pretty major thing.  But for all you Nevada haters, MC tested a 06 (I think) Nevada and found it could stop in 117 Feet!   But that said, the Nevada has fairly advanced Brembo binders/pads, and modern tires, and it only weighs a scant over 400lb. 

The idea that a mid 70s  stock Japanese tub could haul down from 60mph to 0 in less than 130 feet would be outstanding, but sub 120 is beyond real earth tech.

[canuguzzi]

Yep , remember them well . In fact , had friends then AND now that own(ed) kettles . No way no how would a steamer stop that quickly from 60 MPH . Lots of testing done in that era was suspect.
I guess you are telling us that a 1970's motorbike with single piston brakes and period tires would stop as rapidly as some of the best modern bikes , sorry dude .

  Dusty

If you knew how brakes worked, what affects stopping distances and so on you'd probably say different. You do know the most important factor affecting braking distances don't you? Help me out and explain it.

Yeah, argue about it all you want, in fact let's just say anything prior to 2015 is suspect when it comes to tests because unless its on the Internet, it didn't happen.

80s era bikes never could break into the 11s for the quarter, none of them could stop decently, they all got 20 mpg and had 1/2" travel suspension.

Man did land on the Moon, the earth isn't flat, if you drop a ball it really does fall and it is easy to say something didn't happen.

Okay, show some evidence that the bike couldn't stop close to those distances from 60-0, surely you have something other that your say so. Explain how braking after a tire skids isn't truly a waste, it really does make a bike stop faster.

Now, if you have some proof that those tests for the GT750 weren't accurate, go ahead and post it, I'm certain you've got it handy.

[Bisbonian]

Yamaha GTS1000. Rider columnist Larry Grodsky tested it and reported a best 60-0 stopping distance of 87 feet.

It was one of my favorite bikes and the only one I regret selling.

[Chuck in Indiana]

Lots of testing done in that era was suspect.

No! Say it ain't so.. 

[oldbike54]

No! Say it ain't so.. 

 Aw Chuckie , collective memory tells us that all of those tests were completely accurate 

  Dusty

[canuguzzi]

No! Say it ain't so.. 

Guess that means all of it was. I know, they meant 117 yards and it weighed 500 and something kilos not pounds.

[canuguzzi]

Aw Chuckie , collective memory tells us that all of those tests were completely accurate 

  Dusty

As opposed to every single one of them, regardless of what was tested, being inaccurate right?

[ohiorider]

As the OP of this thread, I have to ask ..... what happened to it, and how did it get so far off course?  All I was discussing was the ride reports of the early Griso 8v engines, and how reporters said one should buy the 2v bikes if they wanted good low end torque. 

If I delete the original post, what happens to the subsequent posts?  Do they go bye bye, too?  Or do they hang out there on their own?

[oldbike54]

 Yeah , it all goes bye bye . It's OK Bob , thread drift and questioning other's knowledge is normal around here  By the way , wonder how fast your GS will stop from 60 MPH ?

  Dusty

[ohiorider]

You're tempting me to exert some forum power and delete the original post ..... but I won't.  This is too interesting.

Re the GS and it's 60-0 stopping capabilities, draw your own conclusions.
- drum rear brake, cable operated.
- single front disc with (I think) two piston caliper, maybe only one.
- very soft front springs that allow a lot of dive.
She isn't a quick stopper by any stretch of the imagination.  Best thing going for stopping the GS is the fact that the bike is sub-500 pounds.

Let the water buffalo contest continue!

Bob

PS - Happy holidays to all you WG members!

[father guzzi obrian]

The early G8 mapping was really very ordinary. The GRS8V-01 map had nothing at the bottom and then a huge surge at 5.5K, it felt like a 2-stroke coming on the pipe but not in a good way.

The 68S map which was not homologated for road use was a huge improvement, in fact it remains, in my opinion, the pick of the factory maps. The GRS8V-03 map which is what is used on all of them post about 2011 is an improvement but it's a real compromise and remains pretty unexciting compared to what can be developed by someone with the requisite skills and Tunerpro.

There is no longer any need to pay either silly money for half arsed solutions or put up with e poorly developed mediocrity of the factory maps.

Pete

When Pete first showed up in So Cal with his Pinko Griso 8V, I believe my 2V Griso 1100 was the equal or a bit stronger on the bottom, then his took off. with new maps that was addressed

[toogrey]

If I shower any more praise on the 1200 Sport on this forum, I'll get booted off! 

She still provides a relaxed, comfortable ride after 62,000 miles.  A plush ride, by comparison with my recently-sold Griso.  I don't find the 1200 Sport lacking in performance, but in a straight line drag, my seat of the pants dyno say the Griso would have eaten the Sport alive starting the run at any speed.   I think I set the red flashing 'shift' light to come on at approx. 7200rpm on both bikes, and either bike was ready to keep on spinning up.

I think you're correct on two counts ..... the Sport is a more relaxing ride (IMO) than my Griso was, and yes, the 8vSE did have that "urgent want to run" feel to it.  That bike would roll from 70 to 100 quicker than my reflexes could keep up.  Or for that matter, from 30 to 70!  It was a little bulldog.  I'd love to have that engine in roller version in a big Guzzi standard, or, for that matter, in the 8v Sport that was only made available overseas, but not in N America.  8v Stelvio is too big/tall for me, and I have no interest in the 8v Norge.

EDIT: Either the Griso or 1200 Sport would be a hoot on AZ 89/89A from Prescott to Jerome.  Unfortunately, both times I've been on this stretch of highway, I've been driving, not riding!
[/quote

I was thinking the Sport would be a pretty nice bike, at 62,000 miles I'm sure you've got it well sorted out. Did you have to flash the ECU or does it run ok without it? Do you think the 2v is as torquey as the Griso in the lower revs?  I wouldn't think it could match the Griso after 5k, they pull pretty stout.

AZ 89/89A is a great road I got a chance to enjoy it on my 96 GS1100 which was a decent handling bike. I need to make it back up soon.

[ohiorider]

I was thinking the Sport would be a pretty nice bike, at 62,000 miles I'm sure you've got it well sorted out. Did you have to flash the ECU or does it run ok without it? Do you think the 2v is as torquey as the Griso in the lower revs?  I wouldn't think it could match the Griso after 5k, they pull pretty stout.

AZ 89/89A is a great road I got a chance to enjoy it on my 96 GS1100 which was a decent handling bike. I need to make it back up soon.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sorted, pretty much so.  Most of my issues initially were ergonomic.  And the well-documented (on WG) Mana handlebar did wonders for me.  A set of adjustable foot pegs added to comfort.  Having Sargent rework the stock saddle helped keep me from sinking to the frame rails!  And I purchased a barely-used Corbin saddle which is wonderful on extended, multi day rides.  A Bagster tank cover and tank bag, plus H+B 30L Juniors makes the Sport a good sport tourer.  Switching to Michelin Pilot Road3 tires was perhaps the best handling item I've discovered, though I may have to go to PR4s out of necessity, if Michelin discontinues the PR3 tire.

Engine-wise, not much to report.  I'm running the stock map, and I'm ok with it, though others have informed me that there are better aftermarket maps available.  The 2v Sport engine does seem to want to occasionally go into a high idle condition, but I think, in addition to a good TB balance and TPS reset, there are a few other issues I can address that will eliminate this issue.  One I recently discovered was when I killed the bike engine when starting off in 1st gear.  Then found it wouldn't start in gear.  This was caused due to wear of the clutch handle, which prevented the clutch switch button from being depressed.  At that time, I also found that when in gear with clutch handle pulled to the bar, if the clutch switch didn't function, the idle went high.

The other (I think) may involve an engine temp sensor that doesn't send the proper signal to the ECU.  I'll ck into that in the springtime.

Re your question about Griso 8v vs Sport 2v, with my bikes there was no question about it.  The 2012 Griso would eat the Sport alive, off the line, mid range, and top end.  Of course, by that time, the Griso map had been improved from the original.

But all in all, the 1200 Sport has been a super do it all machine for me.

[canuguzzi]

You're tempting me to exert some forum power and delete the original post ..... but I won't.  This is too interesting.

Re the GS and it's 60-0 stopping capabilities, draw your own conclusions.
- drum rear brake, cable operated.
- single front disc with (I think) two piston caliper, maybe only one.
- very soft front springs that allow a lot of dive.
She isn't a quick stopper by any stretch of the imagination.  Best thing going for stopping the GS is the fact that the bike is sub-500 pounds.

Let the water buffalo contest continue!

Bob

PS - Happy holidays to all you WG members!

Testing.

In 2003 tests were conducted by the NTSA to determine the advantages of ABS on motorcycles. They found among other things that on dry pavement there was little advantage to ABS vs non-abs. But it goes further than that.

It has been said that lighter bikes stop faster and that no 70s era bike could stop all that well or at least in the sub 120' range from 60-0.

Here are some results of a much lighter bike compared to a heavier bike. Note that these tests were conducted scientifically down to speed corrections and so on, with advanced test equipment.

Speed at initial brake application: 79.53 mph or 128 kph

 Yamaha FJR, a rather heavy bike in comparison to-
A Honda VFR800. Both bikes at max weight

Distance to zero

The Yamaha FJR - 229'
The Honda VFR - 303'

How did the so much heavier FJR stop 74' shorter than the VFR?

Now, go to a Honda forum and make the claim that the Yamaha FJR can stop shorter than a Honda VFR and see the howling that will ensue.

Obviously the tests were rigged, mistaken, couldn't happen, one was going uphill while the other was on oiled asphalt and all kinds of excuses. Yet, it happened.

If all things are equal, does a 4 piston brake caliper stop a bike faster that a 3 piston caliper if both are capable of locking the wheels to tire skid? Nope. Is perhaps one easier to operate as far as braking is concerned? Possibly.

You see, because a bike was made in the 70s doesn't mean it can't stop in less than 120' 60-0.

So far, there have been opinions but has anyone offered proof? No.

So where are the specifics since there are claims it did not and more important, could not happen? There is the usual, aw, that can't be but so far not one has come forth with anything more than just saying something and pointing out other tests of other bikes, using that as a basis of proof.

So explain how the VFR can't brake as short as the FJR, a bike that wet weights over 600 pounds whereas the VFR might barely get within 100 pounds of that? Both bikes can lock their wheels without ABS so any brake force after a tire locks up does nothing to stop the bike. In the absence of wheels being locked up it comes down to maybe tires, total weight and if the rider was wearing his Star Wars on the FJR and not while on the VFR.

So what happened? The tests were highly controlled, scientific methodologies used, they aren't accurate?

Was the track the GT750 on sticky? Was the rider 110 pounds? Were the tires hot and near glue like consistency? Who knows, not anyone here.

So you can say that because some tests were inaccurate but not that all were. If you say with the tires of the time that no bike could stop that quick, then where is your proof and credentials as a tire engineer or something like that? Something other than you claiming something without a shred if evidence to back you up? I posted test results that match closely with other tests, varying by only a few feet.

One person agreeing with another without any basis in fact or without specific examples that show that test of the GT750 was inaccurate doesn't mean a thing. All it means is one guy said something and the other one said yup.

[oldbike54]

As seems to be the usual case, you can't even imagine half the things others know.
http://www.abacuscaralarms.co.uk/bikes/Test_Reports/Suzuki_GT750_H2_test.html

The collective memories of a lot of people who also read the published tests of the 60-0 stopping distance of 117' by the GT750 is there for the culling.

The report above show the distance to be 118' but bested by other tests. I can still remember those years, you?

For some reason, some can't believe a 70s era bike couldn't stop that quickly. 

 Interesting , the test quotes 31 ft 8 inches to stop from 30 MPH . Now , if you understand braking physics , that translates to 126 feet 8 inches from a true sixty MPH . So ...

  Dusty

[Chuck in Indiana]

I was hanging out at the overlook at the top of the Snake a couple of days ago with a couple of kids.  Probably 40 or 50.. We were talking tires and the amount of traction available. They were on Japanese motorcycles of some kind.. they all look the same to me..   with balls of rubber rolling off their tires.
Today's tires offer so much more traction that it isn't even comparable.

[canuguzzi]

Interesting , the test quotes 31 ft 8 inches to stop from 30 MPH . Now , if you understand braking physics , that translates to 126 feet 8 inches from a true sixty MPH . So ...

  Dusty

No, it doesn't unless you decide that what happens on paper is replicated on a test track or road somewhere and that starting with a 1 mph speed can be extrapolated to a 60 mph speed. If that were true, there wouldn't be any testing needed, just run the numbers.

But, if you can show a practice where that theory has been proven, let's see it.

The truth in understanding is not implying one does but in being able to explain it to anyone.

[oldbike54]

 Don't have to , physics is physics . In fact , looking at a comparison test of several modern bikes , the best stopping distance is a Street Triple R , 124 ft . Now , quite a few factors are involved here . Center of gravity , wheelbase , front/rear weight bias . A long bike with a low center of gravity with modern brakes and tires will be easier to stop than a short wheelbase sport bike . AND certainly the forks ability to not compress completely under hard braking is a large help . What I am saying is , as are several other here , the testing methods employed in 1974 were suspect . Hell , oftentimes they just quoted what the manufacturer told them .

  Dusty

[beetle]

Just like a lot of dyno's have horses with short legs, they had a measuring tape with long feet. 

[Chuck in Indiana]

Just like a lot of dyno's have horses with short legs, they had a measuring tape with long feet. 

True.. true.

[canuguzzi]

Don't have to , physics is physics . In fact , looking at a comparison test of several modern bikes , the best stopping distance is a Street Triple R , 124 ft . Now , quite a few factors are involved here . Center of gravity , wheelbase , front/rear weight bias . A long bike with a low center of gravity with modern brakes and tires will be easier to stop than a short wheelbase sport bike . AND certainly the forks ability to not compress completely under hard braking is a large help . What I am saying is , as are several other here , the testing methods employed in 1974 were suspect . Hell , oftentimes they just quoted what the manufacturer told them .

  Dusty

That is true enough.

The rider IMHO is more important and has a greater effect on braking than anything else.

I would rather depend on the better rider on a bike that has slippery tires, one brake and on ice that some of the fools out there who have perimeter brakes with quad pistons, new tires on dry pavement but not enough sense to know that braking before impact is more important.

I saw what seemed like a few hundred today. Luckily they were headed the other way.

[ohiorider]

Is it time to hit the 'delete' button on the OP (original post?)  Yes it is!

Damn!  It doesn't exactly work that way.  So, on it goes ................... . how boring!

[oldbike54]

 Boring , well maybe , it is Winter , sort of . 70 degrees here today , but windy enough to peel the paint off of a Water Buffalo 

  Dusty

[Toystoretom]

One of my RE5s....



If you use just the front brakes it will go from 60 to 0 in about 10 minutes. If you use just the rear drum it speeds up.

[oldbike54]

One of my RE5s....



If you use just the front brakes it will go from 60 to 0 in about 10 minutes. If you use just the rear drum about 8 feet.

  Wait , you have more than one RE5  The wankel , only motor to have less engine braking than a 2 stroke 

  Dusty

[Toystoretom]

I buy them when I can, right now I have 5. Once you get that rotor spinning it's like a locomotive, it's hard to stop, hence the twin disks (in the 70's, kind of a rarity). You don't tend to tail gate when riding one of these. They have really long legs though, and if you have a runner you can hang with just about anyone up to a 100 anyway.

[Toystoretom]

Eeeeeee.... parts can be a problem, there recently was a guy that had a RE5 parts business called Rotary Recycle, but he had to close it down. Not a large demand for him to feed off of when there may only be 1000 to 2000 viable bikes left, not to mention people actually working on them. That's one reason I grab them if I can. Some parts are common to the GT750's so that helps, and there is a RE5 forum where some parts can be found. This is a case where it pays to buy the best example you can, and none of this "It ran when when I parked it" bullshit. Well, fire that baby up, I want to hear it, not excuses.

These are weird. Kind of a weak low speed acceleration but get the RPM's up and if the Gods are with you and the port valve opens and the secondary opens its like it takes over the throttle and it pulls like a mother at really high speeds when you don't really want it to and your butt kind of puckers up and grabs the seat. Great fun!!