Wildguzzi.com

General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: tazio on March 21, 2015, 06:48:43 PM

Title: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: tazio on March 21, 2015, 06:48:43 PM
Hit most of the local motorcycle Dealerships in the area today as it was some fine vintage bike weather,
last stop was Marietta Motorsports, a "dealer-alternative, maintenance and performance shop" about a door down from the old Zen Moto place.
Boss comes out to eyeball the Ambo and says "Ahh, guzzi, only bike we had blow-up on our Dyno.."
So I'm asking you all, am I in some kind of danger here. I mean, are these things blowing-up on the regular?
Rode up next to a pal of mine last year doing about 80mph and he asked me never to do that again as he was very concerned about
a jug getting shot threw his skull.
Now it's in my head that every ride may be the last time I see my kneecaps..

Does anyone here have a first hand account of a motor blowing-up? (BSA's don't count) 
 
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on March 21, 2015, 06:57:02 PM
Bwwwaaaahaa.. you're kidding, right? A Guzzi engine is about the least likely to "blow up" of any motorcycle engine that I can think of. They are robust almost to a fault.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Perazzimx14 on March 21, 2015, 06:58:21 PM
No offense but your "buddy" is an idiot.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: jackson on March 21, 2015, 07:00:12 PM
The guy is probably pissed because Riders Hill has probably beat him out of quite a few potential sales.  Add to that, there is another new Guzzi dealer in that area and they are also probably beating him out of a few potential sales.
The Guzzi engine is a very robust engine.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: lucian on March 21, 2015, 07:03:46 PM
Hate to see what you would loose if a harley motor "blows up"
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Wayne Orwig on March 21, 2015, 07:15:07 PM
How many engine blocks has that POS Ambo exploded?


Oh wait, you are trying to angle a new Norge out of this somehow aren't you. 

Yes, that Ambo will explode any second. The only hope is to get a new 4 valve engine like the new Norge. The cam chain holds them together.


  ;-T


 ~;
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: rocker59 on March 21, 2015, 07:49:31 PM
No offense but your "buddy" is an idiot.

 :+1
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Rich A on March 21, 2015, 07:53:04 PM
The danger of a small n, as in: "I knew a guy who knew a guy..."

--the engine probably did blow, but that's just one data point.

Rich A
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: NorthRider on March 21, 2015, 07:57:26 PM
Hate to see what you would loose if a harley motor "blows up"
:o true that! The rear cylinder of my Buell is about an inch from my....manhood!
Title: Re:
Post by: Kev m on March 21, 2015, 08:00:35 PM
Too few data to speculate.

Shy of racing, most motors don't suffer catastrophic failures.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: bib on March 21, 2015, 08:14:18 PM
One can 'blow-up' any motor in any vehicle, its real simple... the hard part is to get the best out the motor WITHOUT destroying it.
Avoid that dealers dyno if you enjoy your bike.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Lee Bruns on March 21, 2015, 08:34:08 PM
No offense but your "buddy" is an idiot.

Yep,  I have to agree. Least likely of ANY engine to blow. WAY overbuilt. Whatever his bias is, its not based on reality.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Guzzistajohn on March 21, 2015, 08:41:17 PM
That's about the goofiest thing I've ever heard. The guy is nutty as a squirrel turd. If an old Guzzi engine could blow up, Ace Mallot from St. Joseph, Mo. would have blown 3 or 4 by now. :bike
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Joliet Jim on March 21, 2015, 08:47:38 PM
I know when my centauro was on the dyno the mortar holding the bricks in the building started to blow out.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Turin on March 21, 2015, 10:36:23 PM
I've never heard of a guzzi blowing up either. I've been riding the crap out of them for almost 25years and never had an engine issue.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Penderic on March 21, 2015, 10:52:48 PM
Hmmm this reminds me ....... T shirt suggestion!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/TS-BombTech_zpsom1fokvr.jpg)
Change to read: I am a Moto Guzzi Mechanic. DUCK!
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: John A on March 22, 2015, 03:54:04 AM
(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag152/jdalthaus/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131446_zpsdfe3e1bf.jpg)[/URL[URL=http://s1303.photobucket.com/user/jdalthaus/media/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131452_zps51974157.jpg.html](http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag152/jdalthaus/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131452_zps51974157.jpg) (http://s1303.photobucket.com/user/jdalthaus/media/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131446_zpsdfe3e1bf.jpg.html)(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag152/jdalthaus/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131725_zpsc34081d2.jpg) (http://s1303.photobucket.com/user/jdalthaus/media/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-03-22131725_zpsc34081d2.jpg.html)(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag152/jdalthaus/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-04-12154600_zps2b27fd72.jpg) (http://s1303.photobucket.com/user/jdalthaus/media/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-04-12154600_zps2b27fd72.jpg.html)
This one leaked out some parts
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Vasco DG on March 22, 2015, 05:42:30 AM
'Are Guzzis inherently more risk?' (Note lack of apostrophe, it isn't the risk of Guzzi is it?)

What does this question mean? What is the inate symbolism encapsulated by the term 'Guzzi'? What form of artistic interpretation, (Presumably tragic!) can be drawn from this question steeped in ambiguity and craving an answer to salve the soul?

Or, alternatively, why are you talking bollocks?

Pete
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Cam3512 on March 22, 2015, 05:53:11 AM
I'd expect that absurd question from a new guy with no clue, but you've been around a while.

You fall and bump your head recently?
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: 56Pan on March 22, 2015, 06:13:54 AM
Yep,  I have to agree. Least likely of ANY engine to blow. WAY overbuilt. Whatever his bias is, its not based on reality.

I'm betting if you had called him on it, he couldn't have backed it up with date, time, picture, or any other witness.  If BS was music, he'd be a brass band.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on March 22, 2015, 06:51:45 AM
Quote
This one leaked out some parts

If he had a Guzzi powerplant in there, it wouldn't have done that.. ;D So. What's the story? I was just cruising along, no indications of anything amiss, and then I heard this noise and the motor stopped?  ;D :BEER:
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: John A on March 22, 2015, 08:17:00 AM
He was over Wabashaw, that's about 40 miles from here when the engine got quiet. He dead sticked it in, they were from western Mn. His passengers didn't want to fly home,electing for a rental car instead. We put in a factory remanufactured TIO 550 if I remember rightly. I think a piston broke and that rod got to flailing around which is what broke the cam. That's the alternator drive gear ready to escape from the oil pan. The rod and a lifter and part of camshaft fell out of the hole. It would have been interesting to tear that one down! All done !(http://i1303.photobucket.com/albums/ag152/jdalthaus/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-05-21170232_zps60c00331.jpg) (http://s1303.photobucket.com/user/jdalthaus/media/JOHN-PC/Camera%20Uploads/2013-05-21170232_zps60c00331.jpg.html)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Tobit on March 22, 2015, 08:48:45 AM
Miss a shift on a V50 and yes, bad things are likely to happen.  Otherwise, Guzzi seems pretty bomb proof.

I'd steer clear of that shop if for nothing else than getting the impression they're skittish about Guzzis.  Your friend?  If he was serious, he should stay on the couch and watch riding videos on youtube.  Motorcycles are dangerous pal, you never know when they'll just explode and kill you.

Follow up by telling Guzzi crankcases were salvaged from the Italian navy after WWII, that they used to be depth charge launchers mounted on the fantail.   They were called Ambassadors, a tongue in cheek reference to a diplomat, making his country's wishes know.

Back to the coffee and steel cut oats.  Haven't had my morning constitutional yet, so yes, I'm full of it.

Tobit
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: John A on March 22, 2015, 08:56:06 AM
If you are an idiot running a motorcycle  on a dyno and you blow it up you obviously blame the motorcycle. Idiots should be kept away from machinery and stick to basket weaving and less dangerous activities.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: dilligaf on March 22, 2015, 09:06:38 AM
Well nothing more to add.  I think everyone has just about covered it.  :BEER:
Matt
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: acogoff on March 22, 2015, 09:08:31 AM
     I once found a good tablespoonful of metal chunks in the oil screen of an amphibious Cessna 185 and told the owner it needs to come apart for a look see.
The owner wouldn't have it and proceeded to continue flying it for another 50 hours before two rods came through the top of the crankcase. Luckily he was not over the bush as they ain't no glider and landed hard on a roadway.
    The main cause of catastrophic failure is very poor understanding of the laws of physics or Stupidity.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Cam3512 on March 22, 2015, 09:33:51 AM
Dyno bike probably had perfectly good chrome bores?
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: guzzisteve on March 22, 2015, 09:40:31 AM
Sergio blew up his Lario twice.
I had a customers Mille GT pop under me as I was doing WOT jetting. He complained it would not go over 80mph. Newly acquired from a guy in WI.
I pull off heads, it had new head gaskets & oval cylinders. Seems the bikes PO went down, bike laid on it's side roaring w/no oil. He broke cyl's free and sold it as good.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: LowRyter on March 22, 2015, 09:41:14 AM
I'd listen to the guy.  It's just a time bomb.  

I'll take it off your hands for $100.  No worries.

 ;D
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: nc43bsa on March 22, 2015, 09:54:45 AM
IIRC, some CX100s had bad rods.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: charlie b on March 22, 2015, 10:06:22 AM
If you are an idiot running a motorcycle  on a dyno and you blow it up you obviously blame the motorcycle. Idiots should be kept away from machinery and stick to basket weaving and less dangerous activities.

+10

I could blow up any bike on a dyno.  Easy peasy.

OTOH, any bike can give up at any time.  Idle, WOT, doesn't matter.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on March 22, 2015, 10:18:45 AM
I timed and installed a Daytona engine for Mark that had been rebuilt from a catastrophic failure. The guy said he was just idling to a stop. Believe me, it was grenaded. What happened? We couldn't tell.
*Any* machine can fail. Simple as that. Notice the TIO 550 above. They're pretty sturdy. ;D Almost as sturdy as a Guzzi.  ~; ;D
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Lannis on March 22, 2015, 10:22:07 AM
I'd expect that absurd question from a new guy with no clue, but you've been around a while.

You fall and bump your head recently?

I was sort of wondering that.  

In six years since tazio has been on WG, there have been hundreds of thousands of posts.   Hundreds of people have described MILLIONS of miles of riding on Moto Guzzis.  

And there has not been ONE example of a cylinder head blowing off and hurting the rider, much less the guy on the next bike.   It's simply never happened.    If it DID happen, it would be huge news, with viral videos, analysis of the failure mode, and endless discussion.

I don't see why all that real-world experience should be thrown into question by ONE ignorant shop tech who was running his mouth just trying to play off his humors on you, or by one ignorant, prejudiced rider who didn't even know what a Moto Guzzi was, and who was just trying to express his bigotry toward something he didn't understand ....

So, no, Guzzis are not at any particular risk of blowing up and hurting someone.    Ride the next few hundred thousand miles in confidence ... !   ;-T

Lannis
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Lannis on March 22, 2015, 10:55:06 AM
Uh , you guys are missing a salient point here . The Tazio was being facetious , he has been riding MG for a bit now .

  Dusty

Dusty -

You HAVE to remember Rules #1 and 2.

1.  "If you're joking, I'M joking.

2.  "If you're serious, I'm serious!"

Lannis
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: boatdetective on March 22, 2015, 11:06:34 AM
A good part of what i do for a living is failure analysis on marine engines/drive systems/rigging.  Both the dealer as well as the rider are idiots.  It would be virtually impossible for anything to shoot up through a valve cover- even with overhead cams.  The only time you see something blow through a  block is when the lower end of a connecting rod breaks free and creates an unintended "crankcase ventilation" port on the side of a block.

The aircraft engine failure looks to be a con rod bolt failure. You can see how the rod cap is opened up. One of the rod bolts is snapped off and the other still has threads. The threads are banged up- so that nut was not on the end of the bolt at the time of failure. My guess is tha tthe nut dropped, then the pounding of the crnk opened up the cap until the second bolt snapped. I've seen it before. I'm a bit surprised that an aircraft engine does not have some sort of lockwasher for rod nuts.  
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: tazio on March 22, 2015, 11:40:34 AM
Bingo Mr.Lannis and Mr. Dust. (I've a queer sense of humor, "kneecaps"?  ~Pisshaw!)
I have NO fear a Guzzi's blowing my dangly parts off!!
And my pal on a multi-cylinder bike can be forgiven as a '70 ambassador @ 80mph a few feet away does sound a little "busy" if it's not what you are used to,
and wise crack comments from friends are what we all laugh about down the road..
..But it does seem like our bikes are taken as easy marks from people in the motorcycle repair business, small shop owners or large.(excluding guzzi shops)
Just wondering, why? LOT'S of "Moto-Guzzi" ignorance floating around out there I'd wager.
 Maybe our numbers are to small to worry about pissing off a few of us, doesn't make good business sense to me.. 
Anyway's, thanks for your responses! Long Live Moto~Guzzi!! :bike   


Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: oldbike54 on March 22, 2015, 11:43:10 AM
 Taz , if your sense of humor is queer , mine is positively twisted  :D

  Dusty
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: LowRyter on March 22, 2015, 11:51:35 AM
Joke all you want.

My $100 offer still stands.   ;D

real U$ money
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: blackcat on March 22, 2015, 12:17:34 PM
IIRC, some CX100s had bad rods.

I had to rebuild my CX when the rod shell went south and proceeded to beat the crank. No warning whatsoever, I had no idea of the bike's history but it was in sad shape when I claimed ownership.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: mtiberio on March 22, 2015, 06:40:16 PM
I know Blaine Paulus once had a rod poke a hole in his case during a race. I have hammered out 3 rod bearings/cranks, all repairable. Dropped valves, repairable. Exploded piston, not much left of motor was usable, but still no errant parts. Once I had a spark plug, whose hole must have been near stripped, come rocketing out while on the track. Now that could've hurt!  Have seen a guzzi run with a broken crank, a broken tranny gear, loose timing gears, timing 45 degrees out, no pinion bearings left in rear drive (let alone debris in rear end), broken u-joints, 1.5 qts of oil. Fact is these things are ditch pumps that will run to within an inch of their life. That said, ANY motor can be destroyed by over reving or running w/o oil.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: canuck750 on March 22, 2015, 10:40:34 PM
If you are an idiot running a motorcycle  on a dyno and you blow it up you obviously blame the motorcycle. Idiots should be kept away from machinery and stick to basket weaving and less dangerous activities.

Precisely

!
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Vasco DG on March 22, 2015, 10:48:15 PM
One also has to ask was this 'Blow Up' on a fresh engine or had some sad-sack simply brought their wheezing, clapped out, 200,000 un-maintained Km shitbox to the shop and said "I want to put this on the Dyno to 'See what she'll do!". If the latter I would suggest that the dyno owner should of explained the chances of a blow up and recommended against it. If they failed to do that? They are partly responsible. If they did say that and bugger-lugs still wanted to go ahead? Well? Well done him! Deserved everything he got!

Pete
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: oldbike54 on March 22, 2015, 11:04:29 PM
Bugger-lugs ? Had to look that up , Pete , you are gonna have to stay in Brit slang or 'Strine slang so I can keep up .
😄
  Dusty


Sent from a submarine in Oklahoma .
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Penderic on March 22, 2015, 11:12:46 PM
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/mirror%20sub_zpshpi1zzxt.jpg)
If you got the Racer with the chrome tank, well, it could be risky!  ;)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: boatdetective on March 22, 2015, 11:20:28 PM
Where do I find a mechanic like that and will she know how to fix my bugger lugs?
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: rodekyll on March 22, 2015, 11:28:36 PM
Where do I find a mechanic like that and will she know how to fix my bugger lugs?

I don't care if she can fix them or not, as long as she's willing to practice.
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Orange Guzzi on March 22, 2015, 11:35:28 PM
I was looking for Kawasaki carb parts and came across a blown Guzzi motor.




http://www.kompressor-guzzi.de/
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Penderic on March 22, 2015, 11:47:08 PM
Me too!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/supercharged%20Guzzi_zpsfhlrf8ky.jpg)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Vasco DG on March 23, 2015, 12:13:10 AM
Me too!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/supercharged%20Guzzi_zpsfhlrf8ky.jpg)

Oh Christ on a Bicycle! ::)

Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: rodekyll on March 23, 2015, 01:15:04 AM
Is the wall behind the pic from that movie about the fastest indian?  Something about a shrine or offering to the gods of speed?
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Perazzimx14 on March 23, 2015, 04:28:35 AM
I wonder how many shins and ankles BMW's have taken out over the years?

Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Rough Edge racing on March 23, 2015, 06:26:10 AM
 The phrase "blow up" is almost always used for any sudden engine failure .A real blow up is the crankshaft laying on the ground or a rod through the block or other  mechanical carnage...I've heard stories of heads blowing off..All 100 percent bullshit except for mega overstressed Nitro methane fueled race engines.... Well I do know a true Harley story where an old engine pulled out the cylinder base studs.. And the rider wedged wood between frame and head...and rode on....Something you can't do with a Guzzi    ;D
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: biking sailor on March 23, 2015, 07:36:28 AM
The proper response to the dyno owner would have been...

"Was that the only Guzzi motor you ever built, or are there others?"

  ~;
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: kevdog3019 on March 23, 2015, 08:55:48 AM
Me too!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/supercharged%20Guzzi_zpsfhlrf8ky.jpg)

Woops... more than fuel to the fire.  That's fuel to dyamite there.  :o ???
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Moto on March 23, 2015, 01:16:09 PM
Is the wall behind the pic from that movie about the fastest indian?  Something about a shrine or offering to the gods of speed?

That's what I thought too, and it is:

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEVzjxVxBVULoAtl1XNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA3NwaWdvdC1jaHItZmZtYWMEZ3ByaWQDQjJ4ME5tTmlSQWF0R2l1LjJoRGlQQQRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDNARvcmlnaW4Dc2VhcmNoLnlhaG9vLmNvbQRwb3MDMARwcXN0cgMEcHFzdHJsAwRxc3RybAM0MwRxdWVyeQNzYWNyaWZpY2VzIHRvIHRoZSBnb2Qgb2Ygc3BlZWQgcGhvdG8gaW5kaWFuBHRfc3RtcAMxNDI3MTM0NDc2?p=sacrifices+to+the+god+of+speed+photo+indian&fr2=sb-top-search&fr=spigot-chr-ffmac&type=576859 (https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0LEVzjxVxBVULoAtl1XNyoA;_ylc=X1MDMjc2NjY3OQRfcgMyBGZyA3NwaWdvdC1jaHItZmZtYWMEZ3ByaWQDQjJ4ME5tTmlSQWF0R2l1LjJoRGlQQQRuX3JzbHQDMARuX3N1Z2cDNARvcmlnaW4Dc2VhcmNoLnlhaG9vLmNvbQRwb3MDMARwcXN0cgMEcHFzdHJsAwRxc3RybAM0MwRxdWVyeQNzYWNyaWZpY2VzIHRvIHRoZSBnb2Qgb2Ygc3BlZWQgcGhvdG8gaW5kaWFuBHRfc3RtcAMxNDI3MTM0NDc2?p=sacrifices+to+the+god+of+speed+photo+indian&fr2=sb-top-search&fr=spigot-chr-ffmac&type=576859)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: huub on March 23, 2015, 03:03:46 PM
Me too!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/supercharged%20Guzzi_zpsfhlrf8ky.jpg)

nice bike, just needs a drive to the supercharger , and a fuel tank :-)
somebody tell the guy lario's dont need a supercharger to explode.  :pop
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Penderic on March 23, 2015, 03:47:12 PM
Its not a grenade!

Itsa motar!  ;)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: rodekyll on March 23, 2015, 07:01:08 PM
Its not a grenade!

Itsa motar mortar!  ;)

There you go!
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Chuck in Indiana on March 23, 2015, 07:05:26 PM
Quote
somebody tell the guy lario's dont need a supercharger to explode. 

Needs grenade valve caps..  ;D (Roper content)
Title: Re: Are Guzzi's inherently more risk?
Post by: Doppelgaenger on March 24, 2015, 12:07:35 AM
http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/4229 (http://model-railroad-hobbyist.com/node/4229)