Wildguzzi.com
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: C908 on March 15, 2015, 10:01:31 PM
-
Hello everyone, I'm interested in getting feedback from those of you that own the new California. I currently ride a 2010 Harley Ultra Classic, please don't hold that against me. I'm thinking about making a change in the near future. Thanks
-
Use our search feature. There have been a lot of posts on the California 1400.
This will get you started:
Would you buy it again?
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=74438.0
The California 1400 merged threadfest:
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=74438.0
The Cal 14 roadtest and comparison thread:
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=58592.0
Cal 14 "Cruiser of the Year"
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=61958.0
-
A local buddy has owned many bikes over the years, plenty of Harley's; currently rides a Stelvio, Griso and 1400 California (as well as a dirt bike). Told me this morning, if he had to get down to one bike it would the 1400. He really enjoys it.
Not first hand experience, but Andy is not on the forums.
-
A local buddy has owned many bikes over the years, plenty of Harley's; currently rides a Stelvio, Griso and 1400 California (as well as a dirt bike). Told me this morning, if he had to get down to one bike it would the 1400. He really enjoys it.
Not first hand experience, but Andy is not on the forums.
He has 3 modern Guzzi's and he isn't on the forum. How can he possibly know what oil to use ::)
-
or a forum dedicated: http://guzzicalifornia.forumcircle.com/viewforum.php?f=2
as someone who has had both the Cali 1400 and a road king, I can tell you, you will love the power of the 1400, and you will miss the dealer network of the harley.
-
You might contact a Guzzi dealer and ride one. It's a quite a bit sportier than a Harley bagger.
-
You might contact a Guzzi dealer and ride one. It's a quite a bit sportier than a Harley bagger.
So, with say 15 dealers across the U.S. ;) and maybe 1 or 2 have 1400's in stock, that shouldn't be too difficult ::)
The place to do it was Bike Week last week. However, I remember the MG Product Manager for Accessories saying that they were going to have their bikes at another upcoming rally or show. But I don't remember where?
-
I have the 2014 Touring, 3 words "Love it, Love it, Love it" Maybe that's more than 3, but I love it!! First bike that I really can't wait to get back on after the winter, was anxious before, but with this one, just can't wait.
-
So, with say 15 dealers across the U.S. ;) and maybe 1 or 2 have 1400's in stock, that shouldn't be too difficult ::)
Well, FWIW, I didn't have a problem catching a demo ride on one within weeks of it hitting the dealer's showroom. And FBF isn't exactly known as the most accommodating dealer.
But yes, in some locations you may have to travel further than others to get a ride.
Of course, if you're talking about spending $15-18k on a new bike, I would think it would be worth the time/effort, no?
-
So, with say 15 dealers across the U.S. ;) and maybe 1 or 2 have 1400's in stock, that shouldn't be too difficult ::)
The place to do it was Bike Week last week. However, I remember the MG Product Manager for Accessories saying that they were going to have their bikes at another upcoming rally or show. But I don't remember where?
Daytona is a long way from Sedalia, Missouri.
-
Try before you buy- but I've never heard anything other than positive first impressions. Handling will appear significantly lighter than what you are used to. Acceleration is smooth and effortless. Fit and finish is impressive. These machines look tremendous in the flesh. You will likely want to change the seat to suit you after some road time.
-
I really enjoy my 2014 custom, traded a t100 bonneville as we needed something larger for two up touring. I was shocked at the performance when my wife and I took a demo ride. The motor is super smooth and the brakes and handling are superb. Only dislikes were easy to address, the stock seat sucked,and their gel seat upgrade sucked as well. Also not to crazy about the plastic bits, something you wont find on the harley's. But once you ride one , it's hard not to seriously consider owning it. Like all guzzi,s you have to accept the depreciation hit, but it is so competitively priced compared to harley, I think it's a wash. It's a lot of bike for the money, especially when you consider abs and traction control as standard. You will definatly find a lot more info if you search this forum, best of luck on your quest.
-
Handling will appear significantly lighter than what you are used to.
Once again I've got to be the only guy here who thinks there isn't that big a difference in handling between the Cali 1400 and the late-model FLH series.
Not even like the difference between my V7 and Sportster... or Duc and Sportster...
-
You're not the only one.
Guzzi aimed the Cal 14 squarely at the Road King and hit the mark. Also would include the new Indian Chief.
The Guzzi's engine has more top end than the other two, and the Cal 14 may have a little more ground clearance, but three good riders on Cal 14, Road King, and Chief wouldn't be holding each other up.
You might be able to push the Cal 14 a little further out of the intended "touring cruiser" envelope than the other two, but 99% of the customers buying these behemoths will not, so it's almost a moot point.
I really liked the Cal 14 that I rode, but line up similarly equipped California 1400s, Road Kings, Chiefs, and it would be a tough choice for me. They each have advantages and disadvantages, and it would be a tough choice.
And I'm a Guzzi Die Hard !!!
-
You're not the only one.
Guzzi aimed the Cal 14 squarely at the Road King and hit the mark. Also would include the new Indian Chief.
The Guzzi's engine has more top end than the other two, and the Cal 14 may have a little more ground clearance, but three good riders on Cal 14, Road King, and Chief wouldn't be holding each other up.
You might be able to push the Cal 14 a little further out of the intended "touring cruiser" envelope than the other two, but 99% of the customers buying these behemoths will not, so it's almost a moot point.
I really liked the Cal 14 that I rode, but line up similarly equipped California 1400s, Road Kings, Chiefs, and it would be a tough choice for me. They each have advantages and disadvantages, and it would be a tough choice.
And I'm a Guzzi Die Hard !!!
Heartily agreed... ;-T
-
I really liked the Cal 14 that I rode, but line up similarly equipped California 1400s, Road Kings, Chiefs, and it would be a tough choice for me. They each have advantages and disadvantages, and it would be a tough choice.
Unless you compare the stength of the Dealer networks!
-
The Indian Chief typically comes out on top by a whisker when compared to the 1400 - because of better lean angles and better handling. Still, it's a matter of personal preference. I"ve ridden the Chief and she is a very nice bike, just wasn't able to push some limits. Have not ridden the 1400 yet. I think I could go with either machine.
Andy put a Corbin on his and is very happy with it. He also went the Agostini's (sp?) exhaust, adds a bit of a bark to the machine - I thought stock was just fine; but then I run the stock can on the Griso so who am I to say? ;D
-
Unless you compare the stength of the Dealer networks!
Well, that's just one of the advantages (for Harley) and disadvantages (for Indian and Guzzi).
But there's more to the equation no?
I have to confess though, after seriously pursuing all 4 (I'll throw the Victory models in there too) for a year or so, I'm probably leaning towards the Harley.
-
Unless you compare the stength of the Dealer networks!
Jerry,
You're really hatin' on Guzzis in your last few posts.
One of the great things about Guzzis FOR ME over the past 18 years has been the fact that I didn't NEED a nearby dealer to support my Guzzis.
I've owned six of them in that time and have logged over 100,000 miles on Guzzis since buying my Sport 1100 in March 1997.
For owners like me, and those much more capable than me, the proximity of a dealership may take a lower priority than other items on "the list".
The dealership thing sounds like a real sticking point for you. Complaining about it here will not really change anything. If nearby dealership support is at the top your your "list", then Guzzi is likely not the brand for you.
-
here is one with 4500 miles and $5500 in bling: http://guzzicalifornia.forumcircle.com/viewtopic.php?t=231
-
Welcome C908. Lots of folks here have ridden many different brands so no worries. I had a stock Dyna Superglide for a while but there were are just so many of them that I felt virtually invisible. If you buy the 1400 you don't have to worry much about losing your bike in the parking lot!
And when you to check one out take a good look at it from the rear :BEER:
(http://static.blogo.it/twowheelsblog/a/apr/aprilia-caponord-1200-e-moto-guzzi-california-1400-01/Moto_Guzzi_California_1400_2012_3.jpg)
-
Jerry,
You're really hatin' on Guzzis in your last few posts.
One of the great things about Guzzis FOR ME over the past 18 years has been the fact that I didn't NEED a nearby dealer to support my Guzzis.
I've owned six of them in that time and have logged over 100,000 miles on Guzzis since buying my Sport 1100 in March 1997.
For owners like me, and those much more capable than me, the proximity of a dealership may take a lower priority than other items on "the list".
The dealership thing sounds like a real sticking point for you. Complaining about it here will not really change anything. If nearby dealership support is at the top your your "list", then Guzzi is likely not the brand for you.
I'm not hatin' Guzzi's or complaining. I've had 5 Guzzi's, so I'm not new to this. I was merely responding to a comparison between the 1400, Indian, and Road King and the advantages/disadvantages of each. I'm happy for you that not having a nearby dealer isn't an issue. But for some of us spending $16K for a new bike and then have to travel a state or two away for warranty service, it might be a strong consideration when comparing the 3 bikes.
-
I do have to wonder if it is going to get harder and harder to get by without a dealer as these things become more dependent on electronics.
I guess Guzzidiag handles a LOT of the potential issues, but it's not having a lot of luck with the 1TB V7s (many aren't connecting and there's no way to read/write maps yet). If something does go wrong with the TB unit I pretty much need to haul it 75+ miles to a dealer in another state.
The Cali 1400 has even more electronic components...
-
Me, too.
-
I do have to wonder if it is going to get harder and harder to get by without a dealer as these things become more dependent on electronics.
I guess Guzzidiag handles a LOT of the potential issues, but it's not having a lot of luck with the 1TB V7s (many aren't connecting and there's no way to read/write maps yet). If something does go wrong with the TB unit I pretty much need to haul it 75+ miles to a dealer in another state.
The Cali 1400 has even more electronic components...
the main reason I sold mine...
-
I do have to wonder if it is going to get harder and harder to get by without a dealer as these things become more dependent on electronics.
I guess Guzzidiag handles a LOT of the potential issues, but it's not having a lot of luck with the 1TB V7s (many aren't connecting and there's no way to read/write maps yet). If something does go wrong with the TB unit I pretty much need to haul it 75+ miles to a dealer in another state.
The Cali 1400 has even more electronic components...
Drive By Wire for instance
-
The Indian Chief typically comes out on top by a whisker when compared to the 1400 - because of better lean angles and better handling. Still, it's a matter of personal preference. I"ve ridden the Chief and she is a very nice bike, just wasn't able to push some limits. Have not ridden the 1400 yet. I think I could go with either machine.
Andy put a Corbin on his and is very happy with it. He also went the Agostini's (sp?) exhaust, adds a bit of a bark to the machine - I thought stock was just fine; but then I run the stock can on the Griso so who am I to say? ;D
Disagree. I think the Cali is handler of the bunch. In fact, I'll take the Harley over the Indian. If you can't push the bike at the limit, then that's the limit, not the spec. And I agree, you can't push the Chief at the limit with the (too) wide bar and heavy weight like you can the Cali (or even the RK).
The Cal 14 is simply the more sporting ride considering the power curve, handling and braking. All 3 suffer from feet forward syndrome.
-
Drive By Wire for instance
Like what stranded Charlie (Avvacatto) that first week he had his.
Granted, if we'd thought to go home and get my laptop and the OBD-II cables we might have known it was the demand sensor.
But it was a brand new (like 2 day old) bike with a warranty so that seemed silly for us to pursue ourselves.
Still, we COULD have...
-
Disagree. I think the Cali is handler of the bunch. In fact, I'll take the Harley over the Indian. If you can't push the bike at the limit, then that's the limit, not the spec. And I agree, you can't push the Chief at the limit with the (too) wide bar and heavy weight like you can the Cali (or even the RK).
The Cal 14 is simply the more sporting ride considering the power curve, handling and braking. All 3 suffer from feet forward syndrome.
But that point of comparing lean angles and push-ability, we're measuring with yard sticks when we could be using micrometers. These bikes just aren't all that different from each other (I'm saying that generally in a good way as they all pretty much hit the intended target).
-
I do have to wonder if it is going to get harder and harder to get by without a dealer as these things become more dependent on electronics.
I guess Guzzidiag handles a LOT of the potential issues, but it's not having a lot of luck with the 1TB V7s (many aren't connecting and there's no way to read/write maps yet). If something does go wrong with the TB unit I pretty much need to haul it 75+ miles to a dealer in another state.
The Cali 1400 has even more electronic components...
That may be changing very soon I hope.
-
I really like my California 1400, but it's my first heavy cruiser so I have nothing to compare it to. It's heavy to move in the garage, but once underway it is very smooth and easy to handle (and I'm short).
But you won't get many Cool Points in public because it is just so rare that nobody even knows how cool it actually is. :P Like driving a 1969 Datsun Fairlady Z.
-
Drive By Wire for instance
I think the new V7 version 2 has traction control, if it has that it has TBW
-
I think the new V7 version 2 has traction control, if it has that it has TBW
I know that it's been debated back and forth since the introduction, but the thinking is the current 1TB V7 (like my Stone) is supposedly a TBW (or partial TBW system).
-
IMO, telling the OP that he won't notice a performance difference between his Ultra Classic and a Cali 1400 Touring is hogwash.
The Harley is around 150 lbs heavier, has about 20% less lean angle, is down about 10 hp, doesn't have traction control, likely doesn't have ABS, and comes from the factory with a grossly under-sprung suspension. The post 2009 FLH chassis may have been an improvement over the wiggly H-D touring chassis of years past, but it can't touch the new California's chassis for rigidity, feel, and feedback. Adding the Ultra's fork-mounted batwing fairing to the Harley chassis doesn't help matters; the bike steers like a truck compared to the Guzzi.
I have yet to ride an Indian Chieftan, so I'll reserve final judgment on a Guzzi-Indian comparison. However, from reading comparison tests and looking at spec sheets (always tricky business, I'll admit), I'd be surprised if the Guzzi was not the better overall performer.
-
IMO, telling the OP that he won't notice a performance difference between his Ultra Classic and a Cali 1400 Touring is hogwash.
The Harley is around 150 lbs heavier, has about 20% less lean angle, is down about 10 hp, doesn't have traction control, likely doesn't have ABS, and comes from the factory with a grossly under-sprung suspension. The post 2009 FLH chassis may have been an improvement over the wiggly H-D touring chassis of years past, but it can't touch the new California's chassis for rigidity, feel, and feedback. Adding the Ultra's fork-mounted batwing fairing to the Harley chassis doesn't help matters; the bike steers like a truck compared to the Guzzi.
I have yet to ride an Indian Chieftan, so I'll reserve final judgment on a Guzzi-Indian comparison. However, from reading comparison tests and looking at spec sheets (always tricky business, I'll admit), I'd be surprised if the Guzzi was not the better overall performer.
126# heavier to be pedantic - Cal 1400 Touring 753 wet (not including a topcase or backrest, which one might presume he'll add, so the difference will be closer to 100# when all is said and done) and current Ultra 879#.
Where are you getting the 20% lean angle difference? I'm not sure I've ever seen a spec on a Cal 1400, but I'd be interested in it.
That said, what does 20% come to in this case - 6 degrees - I'm skeptical of that number... maybe though.
ABS - not sure about the 2010, but obviously the current could. Not that I think that's a game changer on "handling" which is what we were discussing.
Same goes for traction control, which I think in either case probably doesn't come into play unless it's raining.
I call total and utter BS on the suspension, the FLH's I've ridden (and I've ridden many) were all fine in that regard. I noticed nothing superior about the Cali 1400 suspension.
And handling for that matter, I go back to the fact that 99% of riders aren't going to be scraping the floorboards on either of these behemoths anyway.
-
Kev,
I've seen as-tested running weights for the Ultra C at greater than 900 lbs, but okay, a ONE HUNDRED POUND DIFFERENCE -- Holy shyte! That's almost a different class of motorcycle!
I recall seeing lean angles for the Guzzi in the high-30's/ near 40 (can't seem to find it now); Ultra C is 31 degrees, but c'mon -- EVERY tester who's written about the Cali has remarked on its greater-that-cruiser-class lean angles. There is a noticeable difference between the Guzzi and the Harley. Every time I test-ride a Big Twin, I scrape hard parts without even trying; on the Cali, I could not get any parts to scrape -- and I tried!
On anything other than smooth pavement, every FLH I've ridden has had a bad case of suspension pogo-ing. They are sprung too soft, the fork is under-damped, and the rear shocks don't have enough travel. If you stiffen the air shocks to reduce the movement out back, you get your lumbar region hammered. It's an old-tech, budget suspension on a $25,000 motorcycle. Buy one and then add $4,000 in aftermarket suspension parts and tuning, and you might have something that can keep up with the $18,500 Guzzi.
Traction control only matters in the rain? I disagree, but okay, I see you point -- Harleys never get ridden in the rain. (That's what you meant, right? ;) )
The only "performance" H-D wants to talk about is torque. The much smaller California 1400 engine makes only 9 ft/lbs less maximum torque, but reaches its peak 700 rpm sooner. Check and mate, Moto Guzzi.
That most riders will not ride these bikes at 10/10ths, or even 9/10ths, is not the point. It's about the feelings of confidence and exhilaration that you get from a high-performance machine versus a more pedestrian vehicle. Both my gf's Chevy Trail Blazer and my BMW E90 will get us from point A to point B, and I will never use the BMW to its full potential, but I know which one I prefer to drive....
-
When Pete's Cali was stashed at my place, I thrashed it in the twisty bits of SoCal, it handled very well, and I did bevel his floorboards for free. With the power the Cali makes, and the flat torque curve, the traction control is nice to have when you're powering out of a corner in the Santa Monica mountains. I really liked Pete's Cali, and I don't care for cruisers, but it was a blast to ride. Pete rode it everywhere with Jude and didn't have a hiccup, Pete's buddy took it up to Seattle, and when he returned, the only problem he had was the crossover leaking, which the local dealer fixed under warranty and was a known problem. It had a fair amount of mileage without a single glitch. Just sayin... I have not ridden the competition, but I like the power, and I don't know if the Harley could keep up, or the Indian could with its weight
-
YouCan - I think most of our disagreement is a matter of degree or perspective, though I think we just flat out disagree on a few points no matter what.
To directly respond to your points.
Weight - I'm sure you can accessorize an Ultra C ridiculously and increase the weight even more. And let's be honest, an Ultra with fairing, radio, front and REAR crashbars, tour pack etc. is a bit of an unfair comparison to a Cali 1400 T in the weight department since the Cali is missing a bunch of that stuff.
Perhaps an RK vs. Cali T is a better comparison at that point (MUCH more similarly equipped). At that point we're talking a 59# difference.
But when I talk about 100# or so not meaning that much in THIS CATEGORY of bike, I stand by it. That might be significant to a V7, but it's almost meaningless to a tour bike.
Hell, the BMW K1200LT's used to weigh 860# wet, a GL1800 Wing has broken the 900# mark stock.
And, as I've stated before my R1100RSa weighed nearly 200# less than my RK, but the RK FELT LIGHTER from the saddle because of the center of gravity.
Lean Angle Spec - 31.9 degrees (effectively 32) is the published spec on an Ultra. Saying that you've scraped hard parts when you ride a big twin is almost meaningless though. What model did you ride? Half of them are lowered and have less angle. How was the suspension set-up? Were you leaning with the bike or leaning it under you? Frankly if everything is set-up right, and you still scrape too easily, then fine, THAT BIKE is likely NOT FOR YOU. Move on. I don't think 6 degrees more (if that's even the difference) is going to be the determining factor for most people looking to buy a Cali, Indian, or FLH. Others here have stated they could easily scrape parts on the Cali too.
Suspension - This one puzzles me. I want to make a princess and the pea comment because I just don't know what it takes to please you on this. I've ridden plenty of bikes with bad suspensions. I know what hammering can be and the FLH just doesn't do that to me. And that's fine, people have different tolerances for such things I get that, but you hold up the Cali as some sort of standard comparatively? There's nothing earth shattering about the design or quality of components on the Guzzi. I can't see it being THAT much more (if any) comfortable. Or are we bag on performance? Because again, though you CAN ride these bikes in a somewhat spirited manner, that's NOT what they are generally intended to do.
Traction Control - yuck yuck, your jokes aside, TC only becomes an issue in the DRY when the power-to-weight ratio is a LOT more aggressive than the GUZZI or the Harley. And there are certainly those who feel the Cali is horrible on broken pavement or dirt/gravel too so don't tell me it's an advantage there. Personally I don't see the need for it on these bikes, though I can't see the harm when it comes to wet weather so I'm not bitching.
Power - no doubt the Guzzi makes more peak HP - reports I have suggest we're talking 84 at the rear wheel, though not until 6500 rpm, the Harley peaks at only low 60's at 5000 rpm. But the Harley makes a few ft. lbs. more peaking at only 250 rpm after the Cali. Though I'd sure like to see comparative torque curves, as I bet the Cali drops off quicker. But yeah, if a few tenths is important to you in straight line acceleration, the Guzzi takes that category. That's not exactly check-mate to most people in this segment though. And the Harley is EASILY upgraded for more power - just pipes/air-cleaner and tune will easily meet or beat Guzzi numbers on that one.
Feel - You're right that someone should buy the one that feels BEST TO THEM. But trying to call the Cali 1400 a BMW and the Harley a Chevy is disingenuous. If the Harley is an SUV, the Cali is a crossover ute at best.
-
My 2013 FLHP was new when I bought it. It had the singularly most attrocious suspension of any motorcycle I have ever riden or owned. The shocks came off the 2nd day I owned it. When I get around to it, the forks will get revalved. It was stable at 95, but no more so than my Cal14. The Cal 14 out handles it hands down. I put 15000 miles on the Cali before I sold it. My FLHP currently has 8000 miles
-
My 2013 FLHP was new when I bought it. It had the singularly most attrocious suspension of any motorcycle I have ever riden or owned. The shocks came off the 2nd day I owned it. When I get around to it, the forks will get revalved. It was stable at 95, but no more so than my Cal14. The Cal 14 out handles it hands down. I put 15000 miles on the Cali before I sold it. My FLHP currently has 8000 miles
Correct me if I'm wrong, not these types of bikes were not your thing most of your life correct? Meaning you were a racer right? And most of your bikes were more sporting in the first place?
I mean even taking about riding either of these at 95 mph tells the story, that's not the point of these bikes, Cali included.
-
I almost purchased a 2012 rk classic before I rode the cali. It definitely felt way heavier both at rest and handling wise. Was not impressed with the braking but it did have a lot of low end . It had been modified by the seller with a stage 4 big bore kit and rinehart pipes, the sound was a liitle to much for my taste. I test rode that beast several times as it belonged to a good friend of mine, but it just seemed too loud and too heavy for me. I was struggling to find a standard style cruiser that didn't weigh 900 lbs. yet was big enough to be a good touring mount. The cali was really the only one out there that fell in that range and offered the performance features I was looking for, mainly powerful brakes with abs. I have always had a thing for brakes, and the cali definitely has em. There is no doubt it is still a heavy bike , but not as heavy, and definitely handles like a much lighter bike once underway. As for the technology, time will tell, I figure if it's there as a safety improvement than it's worth the gamble. Knowing those brakes could save my ass, I'll be more than happy to put up with risk of any down time. Nothing against the Harley's, will likely own one again someday , but I haven't ridden one yet that can come close to the performance of the Guzzi.
(http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f10/whaler123/DSC_0048_zps12db6ce8.jpg)
-
YouCan - I think most of our disagreement is a matter of degree
degree of Harley love?
-
degree of Harley love?
Meh, I love Guzzis too.
Lucian, I dunno man, like I already pointed out a standard RK is literally only 59# heavier and just barely over 800#.
And as for brakes they have dual 4-pot Brembo.
<shrugs>
-
Kev, why do you keep defaulting to a comparison with the "standard Road King?' That's not the comparison the OP is asking about. He specifically states that he currently rides an Ultra Classic and wants to know how riding a California 1400 (I assume the Touring model) will compare.
-
I've just rolled over the 20000 mile mark on 1400 T, and all I can say is I absolutely love it. I started out on a Convert in the 70's, put well over 100000 miles on 2 01EV's, but this is by far the best and most advanced Guzzi I've owned. I've had no problems to date, and It's smooth as glass. All I can say is go get one!!! ;-T ;-T ;-T ;D ;D ;D ;-T ;-T ;-T
(https://scontent-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/10806455_10204384489685556_8385836601330995932_n.jpg?oh=70d3d623d37e79f235b443c7e7f3de47&oe=5584353B)
-
Kev, why do you keep defaulting to a comparison with the "standard Road King?' That's not the comparison the OP is asking about. He specifically states that he currently rides an Ultra Classic and wants to know how riding a California 1400 (I assume the Touring model) will compare.
I believe I've explained why, to better compare apples and apples in specs.
We don't have specs for a fairing and topcase Cali 1400 (yet). But if one set one up as such you'd expect the weight difference and weight distribution to change.
I'm saying this narrows the differences which I feel are already overstated in many cases.
-
Do you enjoy arguing for argument's sake, then? Because your arguments are irrelevant to this thread. The OP want to compare the Ultra to the Cali; he probably couldn't care less what you want to do.
Back on point. The Ultra is a pig compared to the Cali 1400 Touring -- yes, even with a top case. The difference in weight is at least 100 pounds IF Harley's numbers are to be believed, and according to test data, they cannot.
-
Do you enjoy arguing for argument's sake, then? Because your arguments are irrelevant to this thread. The OP want to compare the Ultra to the Cali; he probably couldn't care less what you want to do.
Back on point. The Ultra is a pig compared to the Cali 1400 Touring -- yes, even with a top case. The difference in weight is at least 100 pounds IF Harley's numbers are to be believed, and according to test data, they cannot.
I don't see where the OP stated he was looking for a direct comparison to the Ultra. Just that he wanted feedback on impressions of the Cal 14, and he was thinking of making a change:
Hello everyone, I'm interested in getting feedback from those of you that own the new California. I currently ride a 2010 Harley Ultra Classic, please don't hold that against me. I'm thinking about making a change in the near future. Thanks
-
I don't see where the OP stated he was looking for a direct comparison to the Ultra. Just that he wanted feedback on impressions of the Cal 14, and he was thinking of making a change:
Quote:
"I'm interested in getting feedback from those of you that own the new California. I currently ride a 2010 Harley Ultra Classic... I'm thinking about making a change in the near future."
The OP says he is thinking about changing rides, from his 2010 Ultra C to a Cali 1400, and you think that the "feedback" he is looking for is a comparison with bikes other than his Ultra Classic? ??? Uh... no.
-
Not sure of the numbers Kev, but the RK just felt and handled heavier than the cali. Also the harley had 6000 miles on the clock so perhaps the brakes were glazed a bit, ,but I now have 7000 on the cali and the braking still feels superior. When my brother tried my cali his first comment was how well it stopped, he rides a heritage softail nostalgia. I am not sure of the exact weight of my cali custom, but I think it is a little under 700 lbs. stock. I will add that my friend sold that road king for only 1800 dollars less then he paid for it . No guzzi owner will match that resale. He bought a new harley flh and still refuses to try my cali. I guess what you don't know can't hurt you.
-
Quote:
"I'm interested in getting feedback from those of you that own the new California. I currently ride a 2010 Harley Ultra Classic... I'm thinking about making a change in the near future."
The OP says he is thinking about changing rides, from his 2010 Ultra C to a Cali 1400, and you think that the "feedback" he is looking for is a comparison with bikes other than his Ultra Classic? ??? Uh... no.
What do say we wait for the OP to chime in on that? Do you have a long distance mental link to the OP, or are you just talking out your ass?
This is a discussion forum and we're just discussing impressions of the California 1400 here. Most of the people discussing it have ridden them, even owned them.
Some of the impressions may not mesh with yours. Some of them don't mesh with mine. That's just the way it is in a discussion.
::)
-
I hear ya Lucian.
Rocker, exactly, this is just a discussion. More information and opinions are better for the OP and anyone else who reads it in the future.
YouCan, I'm of the opinion that in these matters most people bring their preferences and prejudices into the impressions. And that's a natural human thing to do, as we all color our perceptions with our experiences (and some preconceptions).
I'd LIKE TO THINK (but freely admit I may be mistaken) that because I'm a fan of multiple brands (Guzzi, Harley, BMW, Triumph, Ducati, and even some preducts from JAPanInc.) that I keep a more objective viewpoint than those who are more brand centric. But like I say, I'm imperfect too.
Still. I believe my preference for bikes like the Cali/RK/Indian etc. keeps them slightly more in perspective for me where I suspect some on this board tend to try and quantify them in terms of a Griso, or V11 Sport, or worse a STRX or the like.
The truth is an FLH is a "pig" compared to those, but not a Cali 1400, which perhaps falls on the sporty side of the big touring bike segment, but still squarely in that same segment.
-
you can modify a Harley to give you similar performance to Cal 14, but it will hammer you to death. The 14 is freaking turbine smooth. Or order the Screaming Eagle Jackhammer package.
Other than the crossover, they've been pretty reliable. I think you can get a reliable crossover from Guzzitech for $250 and Corbin seat for about $450. That's pretty much chrome or tassels from HD.
-
Damn , everyone of you guys are wrong ;D Or right , who knows ;)
Dusty
-
What do say we wait for the OP to chime in on that? Do you have a long distance mental link to the OP, or are you just talking out your ass?
This is a discussion forum and we're just discussing impressions of the California 1400 here. Most of the people discussing it have ridden them, even owned them.
Some of the impressions may not mesh with yours. Some of them don't mesh with mine. That's just the way it is in a discussion.
::)
What we have here is... failure to communicate.
I AM NOT saying that general observations regarding the California 1400 are misplaced in this thread.
A AM saying that given the OP's STATED interest in moving from an Ultra Classic to a California 1400, talking about how the new Cali compares to a ROAD KING is immaterial, and maybe a bit disingenuous, as it is stacking the discussion in favor of H-D by ignoring the OP's stated comparator in favor of talking about some other H-D model that compares more favorably to the new Cali.
It has nothing to do with my personal "preferences and prejudices," except for my personal preference and prejudice for honest discourse. Kev and I are having a friendly, if spirited, discussion. I don't think that's anything new between us. I would hope that by now he knows that I respect his opinions, even when we don't necessarily agree.
I keep comparing the California 1400 to the Ultra Classic, for obvious reasons that I have repeatedly explained; he keeps steering the discussion away from that comparison and towards a comparison between the Cali and a different bike, the Road King -- because, as he said, it makes for a closer comparison. Even my last statement, that "the Ultra is a pig compared to the Cali," he broadened to include a statement regarding the entire FLH line. No, Kev, I am singling out the Ultra -- heaviest, slowest, and poorest-handling of the FHL bikes for comparison -- because that's what the OP's ride establishes as the relevant point of comparison.
-
My disagreement stems from the fact that I think we sometimes measure with micrometers when yardsticks would do. At the end of the day no one races these bikes, so a few degrees of lean angle or tenths of a second in a quarter mile are likely meaningless.
TO ME the differences in "performance" between an Ultra and a RK are pretty small, but so are the differences between a Cali 1400 and most any FLH.
Certainly they are minuscule if you compare any of them to any other category of bike, like a Griso or Stelvio or V7.
My point is that we may do the OP a disservice making it seem like there are canyons between his current ride and a Cali.
Based on his current ride, he'll be much more at home and familiar with a Cali than on anything else MG sells. So the question really is if he says he wants something DIFFERENT is the Cali different enough.
My stance has (and always will be in these cases) that WE can't answer that for him because it's too subjective (just look at how you and I feel differently about the comparison of his FLH OR a RK to the Cali).
I'm saying HE needs to ride and decide.
-
I heartily agree, Kev; the proof of the pudding is in the tasting.
I also agree with you that the differences among the leading bikes in this category are ones of degree, rather than of kind. I would only add, to paraphrase Everett Dirksen, that a degree here, a degree there, and pretty soon you're talking about a real difference.
Cheers. :BEER:
-
Sure, it MAY add up. The rides I've taken tell me it doesn't add up FOR ME. YMMV.
BTW, I realize this is a 2014, but we were talking about power earlier, specifically torque, you'll notice the 2014 makes MORE torque than the Cali 1400 EARLIER in the rpm range (i.e. above 80 ft. lbs. by 2300 rpm, actually hell it's probably making as much as the PEAK Cali 1400 number by about 1900 rpm):
(http://www.motorcycle.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/2014-Harley-Davidson-Street-Glide-Special-vs-Indian-Chieftain-hp-torque-dyno-633x450.jpg)
I'll also add because not everyone realizes it if they're not familiar with Harley.
HARLEY SANDBAGS THEIR MOTOR OUTPUT TO ENCOURAGE OWNERS TO SPEND MORE MONEY MAKING THEM FASTER.
With the introduction of their current EFI system (dual 02 sensor systems that mostly debuted in 2007) they finally crossed the line.
I.E. in the past they always had the excuse that they were EPA limited and that's why their motors were so strangled.
But starting in 2007 they formally released 50 state STREET LEGAL exhaust systems (under the Screaming Eagle name) which could be installed on their 07+ bikes with NO REFLASH and yield 10-15% hp/torque gains (though I've seen numbers as high as 20%).
So it's quite likely that the 77 hp / 92 ft. lbs. FLH in that dyno chart above would EASILY make 85+ hp / 101+ torques using a conservative 10% figure with nothing more than 50 state street legal mufflers from Harley. And with a higher flow air cleaner and reflash even more.
MCN put the Cali at 84 hp and 73 ft. lbs. of torque. There MAY be more to be had, but I think we both know that MG doesn't strangle their motors as much as Harley (hell, I don't think most manufacturers can get away with that, so I don't think they leave as much easy hp on the table).
I realize that's not apples to apples, but it shouldn't be completely ignored either.
-
^^^ I see your point, but... those are 2014 numbers. The OP's ultra is a 2010. ~;
-
^^^ I see your point, but... those are 2014 numbers. The OP's ultra is a 2010. ~;
I know, I know, I know...
I assume those are TC103 and his is a TC96 (not that there is an earth shattering difference, but there IS a difference).
I'm also just pointing out what is available to the OP - depending on how different he wants to go.
Don't get me wrong in all of this - I very much like the Cali 1400 - and it's a "contender" for my own garage (but only if they do something about that rear fender/tail-light ick, so maybe that new Eldo version).
-
I am partial to this one:
(http://motorcycleindustry.co.uk/press/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/New-Moto-Guzzi-Models-Eldorado-Audace-and-California-1400-Touring-S.E-02.jpg)
To me, this is exactly what a modern interpretation of a classic Moto Guzzi should look like. (Well, this and the V7.) It stirs me the same way the Road King (there, I said it!) appeals to me as what a modern interpretation of a classic Harley-Davidson should look like.
-
Here's my Cali 1400 Custom at the halfway point of a 1,400 mile round trip ride to Big Bend:
(http://i1278.photobucket.com/albums/y518/mjptexas/Big%20Bend%20March%202015/Dirty%20Cali_zpsueidzs34.jpg) (http://s1278.photobucket.com/user/mjptexas/media/Big%20Bend%20March%202015/Dirty%20Cali_zpsueidzs34.jpg.html)
Owned it for 14 months, just shy of 10,000 miles, ZERO problems.
Plus side:
- Fast
- Smooth
- Comfortable. The stock seat is perfect for me.
- No 700 lb bike has any business handling this well
- Traction control/ABS - both have saved my hide more than once
- Electronic cruise control - don't tour without it.
- Did I say fast?
Minus side:
- Gas mileage - Below 70 mph you can get 40+ mpg. Above 70 mph and definitely above 75 mph you be lucky to get 35 mpg. Stop and go around town - don't ask.
- Tires - at 10,000 miles I've nearly worn out my second rear Dunlop. I'll try something different next time, but unfortunately your choices are limited.
- It is a 700 lb bike, although you only notice it when you have to push it. Above 5 mph no issue.
-
I am partial to this one:
(http://motorcycleindustry.co.uk/press/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/New-Moto-Guzzi-Models-Eldorado-Audace-and-California-1400-Touring-S.E-02.jpg)
To me, this is exactly what a modern interpretation of a classic Moto Guzzi should look like. (Well, this and the V7.) It stirs me the same way the Road King (there, I said it!) appeals to me as what a modern interpretation of a classic Harley-Davidson should look like.
ME TOO!
Though I'd want the round headlight, cast wheels, and other blackness of the Audace.
-
I am partial to this one:
(http://motorcycleindustry.co.uk/press/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/New-Moto-Guzzi-Models-Eldorado-Audace-and-California-1400-Touring-S.E-02.jpg)
To me, this is exactly what a modern interpretation of a classic Moto Guzzi should look like. (Well, this and the V7.) It stirs me the same way the Road King (there, I said it!) appeals to me as what a modern interpretation of a classic Harley-Davidson should look like.
Yeah, real nice! I wonder if you could modify this with the "Touring" model components? Hard bags, windshield, etc.
-
Yeah, real nice! I wonder if you could modify this with the "Touring" model components? Hard bags, windshield, etc.
I would expect you could, though I really don't like the shape of the Touring model bags anymore than I like the rear fender.
I think personally I would go with HB C-Bows and one of their partial leather/synthetic bags, but I could do the windshield from the Touring model!
-
Which one uses the best oil? ::)
-
I prefer the spoke wheels of the new Eldo (although I wish they were tubeless), and I am getting used to the headlight (it contrasts with the retro style, but in an interesting way, IMO).
I would want the new Eldorado with hard black pebble-grain Hepco-Becker Junior luggage (40 L side cases and a 45L or 50 L top case) as on my EV, and the ability to switch among plexi touring and sport windshields, or no windshield, also as on my EV. Maybe also add a light bar with twin spots up front.
If anyone here can Photoshop those accessories onto a picture of that red, black and chrome Eldorado, I would be most appreciative.
-
I am partial to this one:
To me, this is exactly what a modern interpretation of a classic Moto Guzzi should look like. (Well, this and the V7.) It stirs me the same way the Road King (there, I said it!) appeals to me as what a modern interpretation of a classic Harley-Davidson should look like.
Can't say I agree with much you say Kev, but I agree with you on this point. I would love a Eldo/Audace mashup...
and as far as the original poster goes, I'd assume at this point he has run off screaming holding his ears...
-
Thread posted: on: March 15, 2015, 10:01:31 PM »
Last Active: March 15, 2015, 10:01:31 PM
So, he hasn't logged in since posting.
I'm sure he will be thoroughly entertained, when he does.
:BEER:
-
If the OP is familiar with the typical attitudes of the H-D faithful ("Harleys rule!" "Get a REAL bike!"), he might be shocked by this discussion. ;D
-
Thread posted: on: March 15, 2015, 10:01:31 PM »
Last Active: March 15, 2015, 10:01:31 PM
So, he hasn't logged in since posting.
I'm sure he will be thoroughly entertained, when he does.
:BEER:
Or so completely confused he will sell his Harley and buy a minivan ::) :D
Dusty
-
YouC - I'd offer to try the shop, but I'm just not that good with the software yet.
Can't say I agree with much you say Kev,
Fair enough. I suspect the reason for that is simply our different perspectives.
I know we've never ridden together, but given your background I suspect you're a much better and probably much faster rider than I am.
I'd like to think I'm better than average and I've surprised a number of people, but I don't fool myself into thinking I'm actually fast.
As I've said before, most of these bikes are more capable than I AM, so subtle differences at 9/10 or 10/10s are meaningless TO ME.
And I suspect the majority of the riding public is even slower ergo meaningless to them too.
Now a bunch of YOU GUYS might be faster, that's fine, so it means something to you.
Make sense?
-
Aside on the new Eldorado photo above: Who makes whitewall tires in the California's sizes? I think there was a thread on this here, or at the forumcircle discussion, but it was not resolved.
-
I think the Eldo above uses 180x16 tires, better selection. the regular 1400 uses 200 x 16's few to choose from...
-
Just wanted to revisit the comments related to the traction control. I had virtually no experience or idea what it was all about until I purchased the custom. It has three levels of intervention you can choose from. It had been set on level two from the dealer so I left there and kind of forgot about it. I never noticed it at all and had ridden many dirt roads and wet roads, and solo I had pushed it pretty hard. Then after becoming versed in how to scroll through the functions one day I shut it off and went for a ride. The first shotgun start with a little sand on the pavement the rear lit right up. And on wet, look out, in sport mode you will be in trouble pretty easy. I never even realized that it had been working the whole time before. I am glad it was on when I did a trip to Nova Scotia with my daughter on back, a lot of wet and dirt and I now know what a terrific safety feature it really is. You can hammer on it pulling out into traffic and not worry about anything getting squirrely on you. It is probably what I like best about that bike, as it is almost always on two up duty. On level one you can have a little fun on the dirt until it lets you know it's there, on level three it wont let you fool around at all. Personally I don't think I would consider a two up bike that didn't have it, now that I know what I know. So in short, I am still discovering the real life benefits of these new features. Hats off to piaggio engineers.
-
Interesting. I'm a little surprised it was so willing to step out, but great report on how it has worked.
-
I prefer the spoke wheels of the new Eldo (although I wish they were tubeless), and I am getting used to the headlight (it contrasts with the retro style, but in an interesting way, IMO).
I would want the new Eldorado with hard black pebble-grain Hepco-Becker Junior luggage (40 L side cases and a 45L or 50 L top case) as on my EV, and the ability to switch among plexi touring and sport windshields, or no windshield, also as on my EV. Maybe also add a light bar with twin spots up front.
If anyone here can Photoshop those accessories onto a picture of that red, black and chrome Eldorado, I would be most appreciative.
According to the brochure I picked up at Bike Week, they are tubeless wheels. Maybe like my '98 EV? I'm going to check with our new dealer here. They have a couple of 1400's in stock.
-
The photographs do not show an outer flange on the rims for the spokes to attach, as on the Tonti Californias with tubeless spoke wheels. If the spoke wheels being shown on the new Eldo are tubeless, they would have to seal the spoke holes in the rims against air leakage, as with the Alpina wheels on the current Griso. It would be nice if that were so, but I am not so sure that's the case.
-
Then after becoming versed in how to scroll through the functions one day I shut it off and went for a ride. The first shotgun start with a little sand on the pavement the rear lit right up. And on wet, look out, in sport mode you will be in trouble pretty easy.
I was thinking about this some more last night...
* DID it actually step out, or just lite up for a second with the sand? I mean, was it a big deal?
* Rain and Sport mode - well, duh.
* Do you think the overly wide 200 rear tire is also a possible culprit? Think about it for rain, snow, even light sand on pavement you'd WANT a thinner tire so it doesn't float as easy. Wonder if this is one of the reasons I've almost never needed/wanted traction control on a bike, especially a large touring bike?
* Same as last point - VASCO - do you think that wide rear tire had something to do with your bad impressions on loose surfaces like dirt? (Though I would think dirt, without pavement under it, the wider tire would be better?). Or, what were the traction control settings you were using? Could they have been the culprit?
I still don't see why something with this relatively mild power-to-weight ratio really NEEDS TC - though again, I TOTALLY understand where it could be useful, like in rain etc.
And maybe I'm just being stubborn. Only 2 of my bikes in the past 2 decades have had ABS and though I've NEVER ACTUATED IT ON EITHER, I've softened my position and would probably chose it on most (all?) new future bikes just cause I'd rather have it and not need it, then need it and have it.
Either way thanks for the report and getting me thinking about TC...
JerryD - INTERESTING - IF TRUE, tubeless would be a notch in their pro column - though I'd still pick cast wheels on a cosmetic and ease of long term ownership standpoint. Of course, it sounds like these spoke wheels allow for more reasonably narrow tires which could be another consideration. Hmmm
-
I was thinking about this some more last night...
I still don't see why something with this relatively mild power-to-weight ratio really NEEDS TC - though again, I TOTALLY understand where it could be useful, like in rain etc.
High torque motor plus the immediate response of ride-by-wire?
Maybe it's just one of those good-to-have things that you don't really notice. I never noticed the TC driving my car until a few days ago; after it had rained I went out and I was a little too aggressive with the throttle making a right turn at an intersection. The inside rear wheel slipped for a split second and the TC light on the dash flickered. Never noticed that before, but I suspect that until then the system had been working in the background, without me even knowing it.
-
High torque motor plus the immediate response of ride-by-wire?
Maybe it's just one of those good-to-have things that you don't really notice. I never noticed the TC driving my car until a few days ago; after it had rained I went out and I was a little too aggressive with the throttle making a right turn at an intersection. The inside rear wheel slipped for a split second and the TC light on the dash flickered. Never noticed that before, but I suspect that until then the system had been working in the background, without me even knowing it.
But it's no higher torque than a number of bikes I've owned which are significantly lighter so have a better power-to-weight ratio.
And it's no higher torque than a number of bikes I've borrowed or demoed which were both as well.
And I don't recall the throttle response being unusually quick or anything like that.
I've actuated the TC on every car I've ever had that had it... I've also purposely shut it off at times when playing, especially on AWD models where it seemed to promote understeer if left active. <shrugs>
Again, not poo-pooing the tech, but like anything we can debate the "necessity" on a sliding scale.
-
I suspect, like many things, the need (or want) will vary with the skill sets and attitudes of each rider. If it saves some folks from becoming a red stain on a guard rail I'm sure there are police that are glad to have fewer messes to clean up and mom's and wives glad to have their men back. Well, most of them anyway..... ::)
-
...the immediate response of ride-by-wire?
One of the things I've noticed about drive-by-wire autos and ride-by-wire motorcycles is that they lack immediate response and actually have a dead feel just off the idle stop. It's a feeling I'm sure I could get used to, but I sure don't like it.
I've noticed it driving Chevrolet Suburbans back to back, one with and one without throttle-by-wire.
I've also noticed it on Harley-Davidson, Indian, and Moto Guzzi motorcycles with ride-by-wire, that I've tested.
It's always nice to get back on my old Guzzi with an actual throttle cable that has instant response and no computer nanny.
Like I said, I'm sure I could get used to the dead throttle response of the late model vehicles. I'm sure I will have to some day.
But, from my experience so far, I would not think of the word "immediate" when thinking of throttle by wire...
-
To me it's horrible feeling on anything other than a sealed surface felt more like an inadequacy in the forks or the bars than being tyre related. Everything at the front just felt 'Bendy' and flexible, the rear felt fine.
As for TC? When the Cali first came out some fun was had at the importer trying to get the back end to step out. The warehouse has polished concrete floors and winding the Cali up a bit and dumping the clutch a few times resulted in a series of black 'Ticks' on the surface as the TC kicked in and prevented the back end stepping out. Once a discrepancy in wheel speeds is detected the reaction is in milliseconds, so quick as to appear instantaneous.
Thing is as mentioned in another thread on any machine with RBW all it takes is a couple of sensors and a few lines of code. Why not incorporate it? The option to turn it off is always there although I can't see why you would.
And Mike, the 'Dead' feeling of the RBW may simply be poor adjustment of the throttle cables to the demand sensor. This would still give a similar feeling to loose cables on a conventionally throttled FI bike.
Pete
-
I was thinking about this some more last night...
I still don't see why something with this relatively mild power-to-weight ratio really NEEDS TC - though again, I TOTALLY understand where it could be useful, like in rain etc.
And maybe I'm just being stubborn. Only 2 of my bikes in the past 2 decades have had ABS and though I've NEVER ACTUATED IT ON EITHER, I've softened my position and would probably chose it on most (all?) new future bikes just cause I'd rather have it and not need it, then need it and have it.
Either way thanks for the report and getting me thinking about TC...
In the 14 months I've had mine I've noticed at least 3 times that the TC kicked in. All three situations were at low to moderate speed, and all involved a slick turn (two with sand, one with wet leaves - none of which was readily visible entering the turn). There's a high probability that I would have gone down in two of the cases. Made a TC believer out of me.
Re ABS: In the most recent situation I was going 75 mph (legal speed on the particular West Texas road I was on) and a 'lady' in a minivan, talking on her cell phone, did a rolling stop at the stop sign and SLOWLY turned in front of me. As I've said before the Cali has remarkable brakes. I don't claim to be more than an average rider, but I do ride a lot. I can say that I would not have been able to keep a non-ABS bike upright and stop in time to miss the car.
In all cases the bike was in Turisimo (touring) mode.
-
I think it has less to do with peak torque values but more to do with how fast it can reach that number. In the cali's case it is damn fast as it is very eager to rev. The fact that peak torque comes at a very low rpm makes it deceptively quick from the get go. It has noticeably more power down low than does my griso and I am sure it would out run it until 70 mph or so. I do not know what a narrower rear would do but I suspect you could smoke it right up if you wanted to with the tc turned off. Like any long heavy cruiser it can be a hand full in loose gravel, I haven't felt that the forks are mushy, only that the long wheel base and rake angle make it anything but an off roader. I do ride many dirt roads here in Maine and do not shy away from them, you just have to take it easy and know it's limitations. Again this is where the tc is nice to have, you will not know it's even there until you turn it off. I also think that the heavier the bike, the more the tc becomes relevant, as it takes more initial force to get it rolling ,hence the greater likely hood of breaking traction if the motor is capable of developing the force required to do so. I definitely have not experienced any lag time on the throttle response. I would imagine that has more to do with proper set up and tuning, after all how fast does electricity travel? For what I purchased it for, long trips, two up and freighted, I have been very pleased so far. It makes a great highway cruiser and sporty enough to still be fun. I am sure others feel the same way about there harley's , bmw's or what have you , it's all good and makes for great discussion. As you can see I have been enjoying this topic, thanks, Dave
-
I also think that the heavier the bike, the more the tc becomes relevant, as it takes more initial force to get it rolling ,hence the greater likely hood of breaking traction if the motor is capable of developing the force required to do so.
That doesn't really make sense. More weight being applied downwards from a heavier bike would increase traction.
Two bikes with 100 bhp. One weighs 400 lbs. One weighs 800 lbs. The lightweight bike is going to be the tire-smoking handful.
-
^^^^ But it's torque, not horsepower, that spins the rear tire. Couldn't high torque at low rpm break traction on even a relatively hevay bike?
FWIW, my experience with RBW has been the opposite of yours. I've twice ridden the Yamaha Super Tenere with RBW -- the throttle was, if anything, too responsive in Standard mode -- very snatchy and made the bike very jumpy at low speeds; Sport mode was even worse -- virtually unrideable, IMO. There was no lag. (I understand that for 2015, Yamaha has softened the throttle response.)
-
^^^^ But it's torque, not horsepower, that spins the rear tire. Couldn't high torque at low rpm break traction on even a relatively hevay bike?
FWIW, my experience with RBW has been the opposite of yours. I've twice ridden the Yamaha Super Tenere with RBW -- the throttle was, if anything, too responsive in Standard mode -- very snatchy and made the bike very jumpy at low speeds; Sport mode was even worse -- virtually unrideable, IMO. There was no lag. (I understand that for 2015, Yamaha has softened the throttle response.)
OK. Same thing. Two bikes with 100 lb/ft of torque. One weighs 400 lbs. One weighs 800 lbs. The lightweight bike will be the bigger handful.
As far as throttle goes, every throttle-by-wire vehicle I've driven/ridden has had funny lag. Don't know why, but it has a different feel from a cable, and I don't really like it. Admittedly, that has been three big touring cruisers, a mid-size cruiser, some large SUVs, and one-ton pickups. As a rule I don't drive many cars, but I recall some wonky throttle response on a couple of Japanse mid-size cars I've had the poor fortune to drive.
As far as being snatchy on the bikes you've ridden, it was probably more related to the fuel maps. I have ridden some snatchy cable-throttle EFI bike that were like you describe, and weren't much fun to ride.
-
OK all you debaters,over anylizers and suspender snappers ;D Maybe someone should mention there are TWO of those big honkin' bikes here in the state on the showroom floor ready for a testride.
-
One of the things I've noticed about drive-by-wire autos and ride-by-wire motorcycles is that they lack immediate response and actually have a dead feel just off the idle stop. It's a feeling I'm sure I could get used to, but I sure don't like it.
I've noticed it driving Chevrolet Suburbans back to back, one with and one without throttle-by-wire.
I've also noticed it on Harley-Davidson, Indian, and Moto Guzzi motorcycles with ride-by-wire, that I've tested.
It's always nice to get back on my old Guzzi with an actual throttle cable that has instant response and no computer nanny.
Like I said, I'm sure I could get used to the dead throttle response of the late model vehicles. I'm sure I will have to some day.
But, from my experience so far, I would not think of the word "immediate" when thinking of throttle by wire...
some ride by wire are really good like the Guzzi, Indian & HD. Some are horrific like the 2014 Yamaha fz9.
-
As far as throttle goes, every throttle-by-wire vehicle I've driven/ridden has had funny lag. Don't know why, but it has a different feel from a cable, and I don't really like it.
Interesting.
The two ride by wire bikes I own (Cali 1400 & Monster 821) both have very nice and smooth throttle response.
-
I guess what I am trying to say is , more weight , more inertia, so more force trying to break traction under various instances . It certainly makes no sense to me, that's why I keep the traction control on . Is there a scientist in the house ?
-
I guess what I am trying to say is , more weight , more inertia, so more force trying to break traction under various instances . It certainly makes no sense to me, that's why I keep the traction control on . Is there a scientist in the house ?
I don't see why inertia changes the formula. Inertia will just be proportional to weight.
You've still got the power-to-weight ratio handicap to overcome either way if you're going to break a tire loose beside of power.
Now inertia may come into play during BRAKING, but now you're talking ABS and not TC.
-
Ok how about this one. While a lighter bike with equal power will be quicker to accelerate, you will be more likely over apply power to the heavier bike to achieve the same goal. Thus more likely to need tc. I love this crap!
-
Ok how about this one. While a lighter bike with equal power will be quicker to accelerate, you will be more likely over apply power to the heavier bike to achieve the same goal. Thus more likely to need tc. I love this crap!
I don't buy it.
Just look at motorcycle drags.
It's much harder to launch a Sportbike with a standard swingarm without wheel spin because of the higher power-to-weight ratio and short wheelbase.
The Cal 14 has two significant advantages over them to help prevent wheel spin before you activate the TC.
UNLESS there's a previously undiscovered design flaw, like insufficient weight over the rear, and I don't think that's the case.
-
So essentially both bikes should have tc no ?
-
I don't buy it.
Just look at motorcycle drags.
It's much harder to launch a Sportbike with a standard swingarm without wheel spin because of the higher power-to-weight ratio and short wheelbase.
The Cal 14 has two significant advantages over them to help prevent wheel spin before you activate the TC.
UNLESS there's a previously undiscovered design flaw, like insufficient weight over the rear, and I don't think that's the case.
Kev m , the wheelie prone nature of sport bikes is more of the limiting factor . As for TC's relative effectiveness on heavy/light bikes , if a heavy bike actually
has enough power to need TC , excepting low traction conditions , a long heavy bike might be harder to catch than a light one .
Dusty
-
True wheelie is the greater risk, but wheel spin plays a part too.
I guess you see it the most though on Sportbikes powering out of a corner still leaned over.
-
I spoke to Moto Guzzi headquarters this morning, and they will have the same bikes on display that they had during Bike Week at the Moto GP in Austin 4/10-12.
So there's your chance to try the 1400 and see what it does for yourself. Rather then a lot of theroretical speculation ;)
Unfortunately, there are no plans to bring the Eldorado to the States in 2015. But like anything with MG, that could change.
-
Easy to get more power --- not really, cheap to get more power ---- not really, will you like it as well after you spend $2,500.00 in performance ---- good chance you won't. The H-D engine give up nothing for free. You want more on top ---- you always trade off power on the bottom. No getting around it. H-D made it impossible to lower the primary gearing on the bikes after 2007 and that is the problem with trying to get more power. If you boost top power and loose on the bottom you find the gearing is way too tall. Harley is known as a V-Twin but it is really a big single with a helper cylinder.
Kevin I know you have fond memories of your old RK, unfortunately they don't make-em that way anymore. Time marches on and things change.
I make this point for one simple but I believe HUGE difference in all the bikes talked about here. Among the lot of bike we are talking about the Guzzi is the ONLY bike that is geared right. At some point the dyno is meaningless and we are left with how the bike transmits what our right hand tells the rear wheel to do. When the gearing is right that relationship is comfortable and intuitive. When the gearing is wrong you are left rowing the piss out of the gearbox keeping the bike in the correct range of torque to maintain control.
No Waltr, I'm not talking about my 96 Weber-Marelli open-loop EFI RK.
Please read my post again. I'm talking SPECIFICALLY about the 2007 to CURRENT models with dual-02 sensor systems (like, but not limited to my 07 EFI Sportster).
I repeat, starting that year they left 50 state street legal power on the table which could be gained WITHOUT A REMAP.
For just the cost of 50-state/street legal accessory Screaming Eagle Mufflers (a couple of hundred bucks), you can pick up (I looked up the original article) approx 3% more hp / 7 % more torque on the TC96 motors, or 8 % more hp / 17 % more torque on the 1200 Sportsters.
If you go with an air cleaner and recalibration (and then you're still at or below $1k for that even with a dealer reflash, or you can pick up a PowerVision and have complete access to your maps for only a few hundred more) then you're looking at LEAST 12% more HP / 7% more torque on the TC96, or 15 % more hp / 22 % more torque on the Sportster.
Those are cheap and easy.
Yeah, you can spend more, and start talking about cams, headwork, etc. and it's real easy to spend $2500+ going that way, and personally I think that's generally a mistake if you want a long term reliable machine. You want a 90-100 rwhp Sportster, it's not difficult at all, it starts with a call Hammer or NRHS, but I wasn't talking about that.
As for gearing, I wouldn't have minded a 6-speed in the Sporty, but it's fine. The 6-speeds I've ridden on late-model BTs have equally not been a problem or required all that much rowing.
-
Jerry, is MG going to have test rides at COTA or AF1?
-
howdy, new to this type of site. found it while searching for MPG for 2014 california 1400 cc. first fill up after buying .. 24 MPG. (all data will be in USA terms) i just thought the dealership didn't top off tank. next fill up, 24 MPG. i am a old guy and ride like one. during breaking in, i never went over 3,500 RPM's and the first 600 miles, 90% was done on city surface streets. mileage was always mid 20's MPG. after first service ... rode to a moto guzzi club gathering in winters, california, USA. a little over 100 miles round trip and 80% was interstate hi-way at 65 MPH. mileage was 35 MPG. also own two harelys and a triumph thunderbird. all are 2012 and bought new. harleys are ulta classic 103 cu in. and 1200 cc sportster model 72. will ride over the triumph to next month's meeting and then post the results. haven't checked the mileage in some time on other bikes, but if memory serves me right ... at least mid 30's in town and over 40 on hi-ways. i have gotten as high as mid 50's with sportster on interstate riding. thanks for listening. ride safe and be safe, the old guy.
-
Does not matter, I stand by my statement that the gearing on the California suits the engine to a T. The gearing on everything else suits the EPA to a T. I had older Harley's and I had a 2007 Ultra and it is the gearing is lacking on the later bikes, Indian and Victory included.
-
howdy, new to this type of site. found it while searching for MPG for 2014 california 1400 cc. first fill up after buying .. 24 MPG. (all data will be in USA terms) i just thought the dealership didn't top off tank. next fill up, 24 MPG. i am a old guy and ride like one. during breaking in, i never went over 3,500 RPM's and the first 600 miles, 90% was done on city surface streets. mileage was always mid 20's MPG. after first service ... rode to a moto guzzi club gathering in winters, california, USA. a little over 100 miles round trip and 80% was interstate hi-way at 65 MPH. mileage was 35 MPG. also own two harelys and a triumph thunderbird. all are 2012 and bought new. harleys are ulta classic 103 cu in. and 1200 cc sportster model 72. will ride over the triumph to next month's meeting and then post the results. haven't checked the mileage in some time on other bikes, but if memory serves me right ... at least mid 30's in town and over 40 on hi-ways. i have gotten as high as mid 50's with sportster on interstate riding. thanks for listening. ride safe and be safe, the old guy.
Welcome.
Sportsters are known for thier really good fuel economy. My last Evo Sportster would return low 50s on the highway at 60-65 mph.
Fuel Injected Big Block Guzzis are not known for thier good fuel economy. Everyone I've owned has returned mostly mid- to high-30s.
Keep in mind that the Guzzi engine will do better at RPMs above 3,500. There are other discussions on the topic on this forum, but don't be afraid to run it on up the scale.
As mentioned, the bike will break in. I've heard other reports of 20s mpg on some Cal 14s when new, but most reports talk of fuel economy in the mid-30s.
Use our search feature. There are several really good threads on the California 1400.
-
Does not matter, I stand by my statement that the gearing on the California suits the engine to a T. The gearing on everything else suits the EPA to a T. I had older Harley's and I had a 2007 Ultra and it is the gearing is lacking on the later bikes, Indian and Victory included.
That's fine, I stand by my statement. I find no problem with Harley, Indian, or Victory gearing.
BTW, when did epa standards change to start measuring motorcycles in gear/under load?
-
That's fine, I stand by my statement. I find no problem with Harley, Indian, or Victory gearing.
BTW, when did epa standards change to start measuring motorcycles in gear/under load?
Noise emissions are tested with a 55mph drive-by, in additon to some static testing, to earn the 80db stamp that's on your OEM exhaust.
-
Noise emissions are tested with a 55mph drive-by, in additon to some static testing, to earn the 80db stamp that's on your OEM exhaust.
Thanks Rocker I meant noise testing not EPA.
-
As far as gearing, anytime a bike will go faster in 5'th than is sixth I just may get the slightest little idea the gearing may not be optimum.
-
As far as gearing, anytime a bike will go faster in 5'th than is sixth I just may get the slightest little idea the gearing may not be optimum.
Well, that doesn't mean that 6th isn't still good for a highway overdrive under the right conditions.
And that doesn't mean the rest of the ratios are wrong.
Hell, couldn't you say the same about the gearing on late-model Tonti Calis...some were HELLA tall at the top end too.
-
Well, that doesn't mean that 6th isn't still good for a highway overdrive under the right conditions.
But other times it is just a nuisance.
And that doesn't mean the rest of the ratios are wrong.
Well not totally but close.
Hell, couldn't you say the same about the gearing on late-model Tonti Calis...some were HELLA tall at the top end too.
My point exactly, just because the late Tonti's were geared too tall doen't give them a pass just because they were a Guzzi. Even so the engines did work over a much larger rpm range so you could just keep then in a lower gear and the engines liked the rpm's.
-
to maximize speed, you need to match your peak horsepower rpm to exactly the right speed. Since resistance goes up with the square of velocity, this can be tricky (the curve is rapidly sweeping up). Add in head winds or tail winds, and you can see it is hit or miss. Cruising in top gear is often more a function of comfort. You typically want the lowest RPM for a given cruising speed without lugging the motor. This is rarely the optimum gear to meet the criteria of maximizing speed. This is why more often than not most vehicles are faster in 4th gear than 5th...
-
to maximize speed, you need to match your peak horsepower rpm to exactly the right speed. Since resistance goes up with the square of velocity, this can be tricky (the curve is rapidly sweeping up). Add in head winds or tail winds, and you can see it is hit or miss. Cruising in top gear is often more a function of comfort. You typically want the lowest RPM for a given cruising speed without lugging the motor. This is rarely the optimum gear to meet the criteria of maximizing speed. This is why more often than not most vehicles are faster in 4th gear than 5th...
I do agree. In some ways your reference to engine performance + gearing makes my point even stronger. ( BEFORE WE GO SIDEWAYS HERE WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT MOST VEHICLES OR VEHICLES IN GENERAL) Harley is not the ONLY over geared bike out there. It suffers though from the SMALLEST usable (sweet spot) power band. By nature it is a big single cylinder with the rear cylinder working as a helper. If you dispute this ask people whose H-D kicked in to 'Parade Mode' if they even noticed the loss of the rear cylinder at lower speeds and low throttle demand. I am not really ragging on the bike just attempting to describe it for what it is. Guzzi in contrast has a power band double the rpm of the Harley. It would be interesting to do a comparison of MG, H-D, Indian, Victory and Kawasaki (the big Touring bike) in a 60-100 MPH roll on top gear. I suspect the Indian would jump ahead initially but would not hold the lead for long. The next thing I will probably hear that this is unfair because the California 1400 has more horsepower, well..............
-
Walt r , let's examine your hypothesis . The real contributing factors involved here are bore/stroke ratios , valve sizes , cam timing , and the limitations placed on the HD's engine by the 45 degree V angle . The main reason why the engines remain smooth when the rear cylinder cuts out are the excellent rubber mounting system , and big old flywheels . Simply put , the really narrow operating range of the HD is a design limitation , not because the rear cylinder isn't doing its part . Rev that engine a bit W/O the rear cylinder firing and it will become a paint shaker .
Dusty
-
My road king has EITMS (emergency idle temperature management system), and when enabled and engaged, you cannot drive in that mode. It only kicks in when you are stopped, and as soon as you try to pull away, the rear cylinder kicks back on. Oh you might be able to stall it if you are a bit too hastly with the clutch, because the cpu gets a bit confused turning the rear cylinder ignition back on while simultaneously dropping the pair back to a normal idle. I suspect you could feel the difference if it would let you, but you cannot "drive" with the back cylinder turned off (unless of course you pull the ignition wire).
-
Dusty, when I picked up my new 2007 Ultra I had a rear spark plug wire go bad within 25 miles from the shop. The engine light came on and the bike was down on power. It was not a paint shaker by any means.
As far as the emergency temp management system that would explain things. I did know how it worked, my 2007 did not have it. I cannot remember who the long time industry performance guy was who coined the term"single cylinder with a helper" was but the term stuck with me. His contention was the rear cyl did not produce the same power as the front because to do so they would have even worse cooling problems than they do now.
I get it. But if some want to defend the poor old Motor Company go for it. If anyone thinks an Emergency Temp. Management System is good engineering, go for it. Certainly cheaper than proper cooling, but I ain't buying though. Maybe I haven't been around Moto Guzzi long enough to develop a subconscious disdain for the brand. I certainly do not want to be a fly in anyone's ointment here. I respect this forum and it's contributors.
-
Walt , I'm mostly neutral re motorcycle brands , they are just companies vying for our business . Wasn't defending or attacking the MoCo . although not really a fan of their products . Some of that may be based not on the product , rather the culture involved . Give me the denizens of the Guzzi world , little or no pretense, nothing to prove , funny around a camp fire :BEER:
Dusty
-
The system wasn't necessary for decades. Even today the system is only for sitting at idle and predominantly for rider comfort.
I've sat in literally hours of traffic in extreme summer traffic and not had a problem. And I've gotten more uncomfortable from the heat coming off my old Breva 1100 than I've ever gotten off my Harleys.
-
PS, I'll have to double check, but I'm pretty sure your 07 had the system, but it was automatic and seemingly never actuated by your usage. I'm pretty sure they changed it to allow rider activation in later years.
-
My '12 Norge is the coolist running bike I ever rode, but I know that was not the case with the 2 valve's. I even removed the black covers from the top back of the valve cover area, no heat.
Peace out Dusty. God I cannot wait for summer.
Kevin I do not know how close to Ephrata, PA you are but the First Sunday monthly rally at the American Legion can be a blast. Lots of bikes of all type to look at. One year I saw a Mr. Turbo Honda CBX parked next to a Norton Commando parked next to a near stock Panhead.
https://www.facebook.com/EphrataFirstSundayMotorcycleRally
-
I've been to Ephrata a number of times over the years (lived in Chester County, PA for about two decades till Jenn's job moved us to South Jersey from Kennett Square last summer).
I think it's probably around 3 hours each way these days.
I'll probably try to sneak away once this year... Though it's tough with a 3 y/o and 10 month old.
My little bro (I think you might know him, Jay/Jas67) goes often cause he's a lot closer (near Hershey).
Bit of trivia. Nearly a decade ago I posted here how in identical conditions our 05 carbureted sportster ran cooler than my 00 Jackal, but my 07 Sportster ran a bit hotter than my 06 B11.
Just looking at the layout of the motor may suggest differences in cooling, but we learned as kids that science isn't always obvious.