Old or New, which Guzzi's do you prefer?

[Kev m]

Chuck is used to sitting behind two mags and redundant spark plugs, a system that will keep the engine running in spite of catastrophic electrical failure.  So am I. I've experienced black box failure in Toyotas and Subarus, and alternator failure in a carbureted Cessna. Guess which one got me home? Similarly, I've had electrical issues with Hondas and Tontis, and been back on the road in 10 minutes. I look at the LCD instuments on a modern bike and think "If that goes blank, I'll need a trailer and $1500 in parts."

I don't disagree that integrating an LCD dash with the actual ability of the motor to function wasn't a good idea, especially when it seems that some CARC bike dashes proved to be significantly fragile/susceptible to such a failure. But that's a freak instance with most modern machines I've come across in that:

A. I've never seen such a vulnerable and prone to failure dash.

and

B. They don't normally integrate them that way.

AFAIK my V7 doesn't share either the vulnerability nor the integration.

All that said the only electronic failures that have ever attempted to stranded me on a motorcycle in hundreds of thousands of miles were:

1. Guzzi Jackal - ignition switch - and it didn't STRAND me as I made a bypass using toggles, wires, crimps from a local hardware store and was back on the road.

2. Guzzi Jackal - starter seized - and it didn't STRAND me as we push started it.

And the most important part of those examples to me is that they would have been the same on an "antique" bike too (unless it also had a kick, then #2 would have possibly involved less sweat).

[Pop]

Whoo! Gee willicurs. Everyone take a breather and embellish. (I prefer 80 proof but light em if you got em). No bike has treated me worse than my V-65, although my Yamama is trying. No matter how bad it is, I love that bike. I'm sure it has spent more time on the lift than on asphalt.
. I should have broadened the scope to old bikes over new, but I was trying to keep it Guzzi. 
Old bikes are like art. They each have their own design like Art Deco. The fact that the brakes are inadequate and the engines less than powerful keeps the speed down. The fact that they are sometimes unreliable brings them into the shop to be coddled.
By the way, keep up the good fight Kev, even though I don't agree with you. I blame it on your youth. LOL
Pop

[rocker59]

Love my 1996 Sport 1100.  Must, since I've had it almost 21 years.

I think I'd like a Cal14.  Maybe they'll hook me in the next year, or two.

[ramarren]

Only the old ones have soul and talk back to you.  Bill

Hmm again. My brand new Racer is always talking to me: "Rev rev rev! I wanna rev! Please! Let's Go! Let's Go FAST! Please Please! Ride me harder!..."  He's a happy boy and wants to play.

"Just hold on there, youngster! Break-in service is just a few days away. We play AFTER you get all your juices changed and your valves adjusted..." :D

[arveno]

I'm kind of a techy, but I fall firmly in the "older" camp, if the Mighty Scura is considered old.. and I would say it is. I don't want a motorcycle that will suddenly stop running if the dash gets some water in it. (!) I don't want a bike that will make me walk in BF Utah because for whatever reason it doesn't recognize the key. (!) I prefer to brake and use the throttle to the best of my ability, adjust the suspension manually.. not what some computer says I can or can't do.
It's that man/machine relationship. I enjoy that. That's why I ride a bike. That's why the Kid is now riding his 1100 Spot now instead of his shiny Grease O.
Now, on to reliability..
A "modern" bike is a marvelous thing indeed.
But.
If it has a failure, it will be without warning. It will be humming along just as happy as can be until it isn't.
An old machine will talk to you, and give you ample warning that some maintenance is needed, if you listen.
If you are willing to spend a weekend once a year and go through an older bike.. especially the electrical system on Guzzis..there is no reason that it can't be very reliable indeed. I would ride any of my old bikes anywhere.
If you are the kind of guy that "don't fix nothin that ain't broke" you are much better off with a new one.

Could not have said it better.

 :1:

[Idontwantapickle]

Which Guzzi, old or new?
Yes.

[Arizona Wayne]

18 years ago riding from norCal to New Mexico Guzzi National, first my speedo/odo cable went out, then later my tach cable went out on my CX100.    Then to top that off I lost my ignition key @ the rally!     Staying nearby was a gal on a SP 2 who's key was just like mine, but I didn't know where to get it matched.    But BJ Schwartz was there and he told me how I could wire my bike to get it home.  So I spent the weekend rounding up electrical stuff to do that locally.    I made it home by remembering where I had last gotten gas since I had no odometer to let me know how many miles I was going per hour before I'd run out of gas.  I made it home OK but didn't like doing it mostly blind.   We're talking days here. Riding long distances bike vs. car are definitely different.    This was just another adventurous bike trip. 

[Carlo DeSantis]

I have a slightly different take on this topic.

In my mind, there are old Guzzi twins (like my T3), new Guzzi twins (like the Griso, Stelvio, and Norge I've only test-ridden), and then there are the "in-betweens" like my '01 Cal EV that had some qualities of each era.

The Carc bikes are much smoother and far more capable than my T3 or EV, but they don't feel as elemental as the oldies.  As many of you know, my choice for a modern bike was an '11 BMW R1200R -- similar enough in feel to a Carc.  I enjoy the Beemer for all of its capabilities: great brakes, 110 hp, telelever front end, ABS, TC, terrific hard luggage, etc.

But there's nothing like getting on an older bike and just going for a ride.  More engaging somehow; more feedback; more involvement demanded. 

I'd feel deprived if I didn't have the chance to ride both old tech and new tech.

[Rusnak_322]

I have only ridden one Guzzi, my 850T cafe. I love it but would love to try a new one as well. The Griso and the V7 line look like a lot of fun to me.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[canuck750]

I like both old and new. The old ones because I can fix / rebuild them myself and new for the tech and power. My 72 Eldorado is at the opposite spectrum of my 2016 K1600 GTL. Both are enjoyable to ride in their own way and I have no hesitation to take either out for a 1000 mile ride.

Maybe the reason Harley sells so many bikes is they are old new bikes.

[mojoe]

I have only ever had one Guzzi, my B1100 but when it comes to old or new I draw the line at Drum brakes.

Modern cars, and the world is full of them, stop rapidly, and quite often for no apparent reason!!
 
You need Discs to stop quicker than them. OR speed to get round them if they are driven haphazardly

[nick949]

I have only ever had one Guzzi, my B1100 but when it comes to old or new I draw the line at Drum brakes.

Modern cars, and the world is full of them, stop rapidly, and quite often for no apparent reason!!
 
You need Discs to stop quicker than them. OR speed to get round them if they are driven haphazardly

Understood mojoe. I'm lucky enough to be able to ride places where I can go for hours and rarely even use the brakes, so drums are no handicap. If I had to battle Home Counties traffic, I'd probably want ABS, Traction Control and triple disks too.  Actually I'd want an armored car - preferably armed.

Nick

[jas67]

I like old and new.     But, don't want a bike in the middle, as in one with electronics and other complexity that doesn't age well. 

I also don't like most 80's bikes (except some Guzzis).   If it is going to be old, I want simple, carbs, points (or a modern electronic ignition retrofit).     If it is going to be new, I want it to be less than 5 years old and low miles.

I love the styling of old bikes, and enjoy riding them, but, for long rides, prefer modern suspension and brakes, esp. in my current state of lower back feebleness
.

[wirespokes]

I'm on the side of the older bikes. I've had newer ones, and while they're more powerful, stop better and have better suspension, they're not that much better than late 70s or 80s bikes. New ones can top 150 or 200 mph. So? The older ones will do 120 - still faster than legal limits around here. Brakes are better, yes, but when the brakes are in good shape on the older bikes they're plenty sufficient.

I don't feel like I'm loosing much in performance or safety riding an older bike in good shape. What I gain is the personal connection to the bike and the experience.

I agree with the comment that one must enjoy wrenching to own an older bike. Finding shops willing to work on them, and can do a good job, can be difficult and expensive.

For me, it's the aesthetics of the machine - I like seeing the parts of the bike - not a lot of expensive and easily damaged plastic. Plus, I enjoy the interaction making things work and the simplicity as compared to the complexity of all those automatic functions, a lot of which I don't need or want. I love my 77T3 and 87 LeMans, with electronic ignitions, which I like, but also carry the points just in case. I've had the Dyna fail in the past.

[flip]

I like the big blocks from the 90's, 2000's and all of the CARC bikes.

[harrytief]

Whoa Rusnak, that is a lovely custom from that view. Any other pics please? What is that tank from...and the seat?
Harry

[guzzisteve]

This all depends on point of view, are you working on it or just riding it.  To wrench on, I would prefer older PRE 05, just to ride would be all.
The newer frames on CARC models are no fun to extract the engine or trans, no shortcuts.
Smallblocks have actually gotten better to work on w/airbox in back now.
All the techno crap on them have detoured me to retirement, don't need it, don't want to deal w/it.

[Turin]

I'm partial to any big block pre-Aprilia takeover. The first bike I ever rode was a T-3. I enjoy that agricultural feel.

[JoeKirby]

I got to say new.  I spent 30 years riding a Triumph Bonneville T140.  I loved it but I was young and as I got older, I didn't know better.  I loved the old stuff, even my everyday cars were a '57 TR3 and a '62 TR4.  Then I fell in love with the first gen. Triumph Thruxton 900.  Loved the looks but I was 40 at that time and found it uncomfortable.  Rode it for years but when I sold it, I didn't miss it much.  Went a couple of years without a bike, first time since 15 years old (at least one that run), and then found a V7.  Better than any bike I ever had.  Love the modern smoothness, reliability, sound, looks - heck I love it all.  The Bonnie was a chore to maintain and ride, the V7 is just the fun without all the work.    Maybe I am just old and grumpy now.

[Tusayan]

I prefer and love Guzzis of the 90s or before, and not many other Guzzis made after 2005.  Nothing from any manufacturer appeals to me much after roughly 2000-2005, but if I were to buy a new bike it would be Japanese - the European manufacturers have lost their basic strengths and values and have instead become second rate Japanese bikes.

[Scott of the Sahara]

Put me in the old category. I love my "old" Norge. It is a 08 Model and is now out of production.
The New Guzzis are the California 1400's and V7 and V9's. I don't really want any of those bikes, so I will stick to my Old Guzzi.

[Diploman]

Modern Guzzis, with their EC-driven FI, instrument clusters, ABS, traction control, ignition, etc., are highly constrained in terms of possible modifications/upgrades, with so many key components linked to the EC.

Older, analog Guzzis are like a blank canvas in terms of possible upgrades - almost anything is possible.  Carburetors, exhausts, brakes, suspension, instruments, oil systems, ignitions, electrical components, lighting and much more.  As was mentioned earlier in this thread, an old Guzzi can be upgraded to be considerably better than when it was new.  I prefer 80's-vintage Tonti bigblocks and quasi-Tonti smallblocks because of their relative simplicity and nearly limitless capacity to accept upgrades.