Wildguzzi.com
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: erik_w on August 24, 2015, 10:51:42 AM
-
Hello!
I have been thinking about the v7 a lot recently, maybe not about buying one, but rather about tuning one as a prerequisite for buying one.
the consensus seems to be 48 hp at the crank and 38 at the wheel - which is quite low for a modern 750. I am interested in the reason for the low power and possibly what can be done to increase it .
for example, looking at older small blocks:
- the v7 sport from 1972 had a claimed power of 70 hp, which is more than 20 additional ponies at the same displacement!
- the v65 from 1985 has a claimed hp of 50, which is the same power at a 100 cc disadvantage.
- the v50 from 1982 has a claimed power of 45 hp, which again is roughly the same at a 250 cc disadvantage!
what is going on here? it seems to me that the engine design has an inherent potential of at least 70 hp ( 40 years ago!), so the same power should be possible today even in a detuned state!
I've also read about tuning the v7, such as tinkering with the exhaust and fuel mapping and even a compression increase seems to bring it up just a couple of hp each.
so, what is the reason that the 1972 v7 sport was able to pull of 70 hp while the 2015 v7 (racer, haha!) can only pull off 48?
-
The V7 Sport is not a small block and the claimed 70 hp is just that, claimed. Those claims are at the crank while they are now at the brake.
-
First of all, the 1972 V7 Sport was a big block.
Secondly, the 70hp of the V7 Sport is "brochure horse power". Not real world.
Thirdly, the small block's Heron Head design limits power, but 820cc kits are available that can help.
Fourthly, this horse has been beat to death over the past six years, or so, since the V7 Classics were released and began to generate lots of new interest in Moto Guzzi.
All it takes is money, and the Small Block can be much more than it is. Just look at Chuck in Indiana's transplant of a Guzzi aero engine into his bike.
-
Take some time to use the search function here, and do some reading. This topic has been beat to hell.
-
Let's ask a more important question: what is the appropriate horsepower for a 400-lb street bike that has to be reliable, have a long lifetime, not be fussy, not require a lot of servicing, and be suitable for riding by newer as well as experienced riders? Seems to me that the newer V7's are spot on. If you're looking for something different, there are lots of choices out there.
-
Let's ask a more important question: what is the appropriate horsepower for a 400-lb street bike that has to be reliable, have a long lifetime, not be fussy, not require a lot of servicing, and be suitable for riding by newer as well as experienced riders? Seems to me that the newer V7's are spot on. If you're looking for something different, there are lots of choices out there.
I'll be spending my money on suspension. More power would be nice, but in all honesty, the V7s need better suspension before more power. I'm not a drag racer and live in the mountains, so suspension shortcomings on any bike can be glaring.
My V7 Special is quite a ways from being a comfortable peg dragger. Both ends need attention. Until then, more power would not be enjoyable to realize.
-
I think the biggest thing the OP is missing is while the V7 is currently produced it is far from a "modern" design.
-
I think the biggest the OP is missing is while the V7 is currently produced it is far from a "modern" design.
Ya think? :laugh:
-
Ya think? :laugh:
I said it before and I'll say it again.... I would bet 90% or more of the motorcycling population can't use all the power the Ninja 250 puts out but insist on buying motorcycles well over a 100 HP.
Oh well to each their own :bike-037:
-
Let's ask a more important question: what is the appropriate horsepower for a 400-lb street bike that has to be reliable, have a long lifetime, not be fussy, not require a lot of servicing, and be suitable for riding by newer as well as experienced riders? Seems to me that the newer V7's are spot on. If you're looking for something different, there are lots of choices out there.
This is the answer. You can get a lot more horsepower from 750ccs, but at the cost of longevity. Hell, you can get 5000 horses from a nitro fueled drag car, but the engine life is measured in minutes.
The V7 is unintimidating performance for the real world, the 750 engine offers torque instead of power which lets you have fun without having to break the speed limit.
After saying all that, I still bought an 1100 because while the 750 made me smile, the 1100 made me grin. Or laugh like a maniac....
-
The current V7 engine is a nice, simple, dependable mill with good torque. That Heron head design is inexpensive to make and works well enough for real world riding. Oh, and it's easy to work on. Yes, you can get more power out of the V7. Any gains are going to be at great expense (relative to the cost of the bike) per hp gain because that head design will always limit how well the engine can breathe. You can't do much to increase the compression since the head is already flat, you'll have to mill the jugs or change the pistons...then balance the crank. As Rocker has noted, changing the suspension will give a much more pleasant riding experience and probably have you going faster to boot.
Peter Y.
V7 with stock engine but upgraded suspension.
-
I just got back from a 100+ mile loop on my ~40 rwhp V7, followed by my dear wife on her ~68 rwhp M696. There were quite a few times I had to completely roll of the throttle and coast for a couple of hundred yards so she could see me again. She loves that bike....I really prefer the V7.
I think the biggest thing the OP is missing is while the V7 is currently produced it is far from a "modern" design.
He's also not comparing apples to apples on a bunch of those numbers... crankshaft vs rwhp, claimed vs. reality.
Ya know, I almost brought this up last week when I got my copy of MCN but figured we'd beaten this dead horse so badly there was nothing but entrails left... but here we go.
September 2015 MCN
2015 Kawasaki KLR 650, 651cc, 433# wet, 36 rwhp and only 32 ft. lbs. of torque
This is a pretty popular bike.
It weighs about the same as the V7, makes LESS hp and a good bit less torque (MCN puts the V7 at 41 ft. lbs.).
Seriously, buy what you want, but I suspect most people who bitch about the V7 wouldn't use all 40 ponies it comes with anyway, so why do they need more?
After saying all that, I still bought an 1100 because while the 750 made me smile, the 1100 made me grin. Or laugh like a maniac....
...which is fine, but I'll add after saying all that, in the past few years I've SOLD 2 1100cc Guzzi big-blocks AND a 100 rwhp Buell... and look what remains in my fleet!
:bike-037:
-
Horsepower is a rating, not a real thing. Torque is what engines "make".
-
Horsepower is a rating, not a real thing. Torque is what engines "make".
Torque is for acceleration, HP is for top speed.
-
If Guzzi hadn't made V7's (the modern ones with fuel injection), I would still be riding a BMW airhead. The Guzzi V7 is the closest thing I can find in a modern bike to compare to an airhead and I REALLY liked airheads.
-
Ok, sorry about that, I thought the v7 sport was a small block due to displacement - my bad!
I do understand perfectly well that the v7 is a very old design that goes back, well not quite, to the original v7 of 1968(?). That why I was comparing the specs to the older bikes...
I also understand that HP is not all there is to it, and that if you try to pull a truck using a UJM with 200 HP it would simply disintegrate while a Harley with a HP of 45 would pull the truck all day. But I do think it is a relevant measure to guage an engines performance.
Anyway,
Seems to me like the v65 is the closest, same claimed HP ought to translate into the same RW HP, so the 1985 v65 gets the same HP despite being 30 years senior and having 100 cc less.
The Heron heads are the biggest culprit? What about the older small blocks, did they have a different head design?
Can somebody point me to a thread regarding a succesfully tuned v7?
The bike I ride today has a claimed hp of 36, so I am not a stickler for specs, this is more out of curiosity!
-
The current "small-block" 750 goes back to around '77, starting as a 500. The V65 didn't have to meet as stringent of emissions or noise standards, so less hp loss to that. All production 2 valve per cylinder small-blocks have Heron heads.
Moto Morini 250, 350 and 500 v-twins (and a few late singles built from the twins) also have Heron heads, though they seem to have done better with it. Guzzi could have learned a few leassons from Morini IMO.
-
The small block engine design, basically unchanged apart from bore and stroke differences, was launched in the late seventies in 350cc and 500cc forms. The earlier V Twins were all big blocks.
-
Not to mention, I'm not sure I believe the V50 or V65 "claimed" crank hp. So between that and lack of emissions strangulation, what's the point again?
-
I don't think you can really rely on the accuracy of the published horsepower figures for the older Guzzi small blocks. Therefore, I doubt there is any mysterious "difference" that needs to be discovered or explained. And even if there were some difference, that would be like Army privates arguing about who has the higher rank.
The older small blocks were probably a bit weaker than the modern small blocks--i.e. that's what you would see if you put them both on a dyno side-by-side. I think the small blocks have always had the Heron heads. The older ones would have had lower compression and probably less precise fueling compared to modern fuel injection.
Jackson is pointing in the right direction. Think of these small block Guzzis as being closely akin to a BMW airhead--except you can buy the Guzzi brand new with a warranty and fuel injection. The BMW 750 and 800 cc airheads made about 45 to 55 horsepower--just like the very similar Guzzi small block did back then . . . and still do today.
No doubt there are various things one can do to hop-up a small block Guzzi. Just like you could hop up a 750 cc BMW airhead. But for most people, there's little point in doing so.
I'm with Jackson, Kev M, and others here. I like the V7 precisely *because* it's so much like an airhead.
Heck, I also own a "modern" BMW 800 cc twin cylinder bike, an F800s with about 85 horsepower--liquid cooled Rotax, overhead cams, 4 valves per cylinder, etc. Nice bike--but I enjoy the Guzzi just fine and don't worry about its horsepower.
If you are inclined to worry about horsepower, then I suspect you will never be happy with a small block, even after pouring thousands of dollars into the engine to chase a few extra horsepower. And your souped-up Guzzi 750 would still not be in the same horsepower category as a modern 750.
-
If you are inclined to worry about horsepower, then I suspect you will never be happy with a small block, even after pouring thousands of dollars into the engine to chase a few extra horsepower. And your souped-up Guzzi 750 would still not be in the same horsepower category as a modern 750.
THIS!!! If you are that concerned with hp you can buy a faster bike for less, or a mind numbingly fast bike for about the same.
I didn't because I value many other traits more.
-
I just got back from a 100+ mile loop on my ~40 rwhp V7, followed by my dear wife on her ~68 rwhp M696. There were quite a few times I had to completely roll of the throttle and coast for a couple of hundred yards so she could see me again. She loves that bike....I really prefer the V7.
He's also not comparing apples to apples on a bunch of those numbers... crankshaft vs rwhp, claimed vs. reality.
Ya know, I almost brought this up last week when I got my copy of MCN but figured we'd beaten this dead horse so badly there was nothing but entrails left... but here we go.
September 2015 MCN
2015 Kawasaki KLR 650, 651cc, 433# wet, 36 rwhp and only 32 ft. lbs. of torque
This is a pretty popular bike.
It weighs about the same as the V7, makes LESS hp and a good bit less torque (MCN puts the V7 at 41 ft. lbs.).
Seriously, buy what you want, but I suspect most people who bitch about the V7 wouldn't use all 40 ponies it comes with anyway, so why do they need more?
...which is fine, but I'll add after saying all that, in the past few years I've SOLD 2 1100cc Guzzi big-blocks AND a 100 rwhp Buell... and look what remains in my fleet!
:bike-037:
My KLR feels as fast as my Norge up to about 40mph. A lot of it has to do with gearing and drive train losses in the shaft drive. The KLR runs out of steam over 60 where the Norge still is very powerful. This is a good demonstration of torque vs horsepower.
The low geared KLR has a lot of torque but runs out of total power early. The Norge soldiers on above 60 which is where you would wish for more with your V7 I'd assume.
-
The low geared KLR has a lot of torque but runs out of total power early. The Norge soldiers on above 60 which is where you would wish for more with your V7 I'd assume.
No, it doesn't run out of steam at 60 and no I don't wish for more, which is why I sold the Guzzi big blocks, and the Buell, and shun the M696 in the fleet.
I've been on a 180 rwhp bike and wished I was on something like a V7, but I'm rarely ever on a V7 wishing the opposite.
The ONLY exception to that is IF my riding was going to be 80+ ALL DAY, yes, I'd probably be more comfortable on a Norge or B11... BUT that's not the type of riding I prefer to do all day.
I should add I rode a little 120+ mile loop yesterday which included the NJ MGNOC lunch. That loop also included two higway stints of about a dozen miles each and the V7 had no problem with 80+ (I'm not going to say how much plus but at one point it was not insignificant)..
I doubt from your description that the KLR would have kept up.
-
If you think a new 750cc smallblock is slow and wimpy and has no power, try an old V50. :cool: :boozing: :evil:
Otoh, it's more fun to ride a slow bike (relatively) fast than it is to ride a fast bike slow and never get beyond third gear without serious possibility of incarceration... And on narrow and twisty roads the small bike is hardly at a disadvantage. Interstate? Sure, but that's for cars or Hondabagos/Hondapotamuses.
cr
-
Just like boats. If your boat isnt capable of doing 100, why even bother?
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/cigarette-speedboats-mercedes-benz-marauder-50-amg-c63-black-61_zpslog1hzaf.jpg)
-
These threads always go the same direction. Someone wishes for info on tuning for higher HP. Most owners say it doesn't need anymore.
Two different threads, very confusing to a new guy. I don't know what a Heron head is, and doubt he does either. I do know it is flat as a board and the piston is dished to make the combustion chamber, very poor design for power. But as the other camp (owners) say, a easy motor to produce (cheaper) than a hemi or wedge shape head with flat top pistons or raised pistons.
With a hemi or wedge head, you can mill some off the head and get higher compressiion ratio, but with a flat head nothing can be done to the head. Also far as I know there is no aftermarket cam to liven it up (maybe the drone engine).
I'm in the camp that wants more HP for the V7, but I know it is not coming from the current engine design, so we wait and grow older!
-
Here's a link to an article about the Heron head...the good and bad:
http://www.italian.sakura.ne.jp/bad_toys/heronhead/
Peter Y.
-
Dang it Peter. I went to your link, and it rekindled my long standing desire for a Moto Morini 3 1/2.
-
No v65 ever rolled off the line making 50hp, not even at the crank. I have a pretty cherry v65sp, with less than 10k, I have never bothered to dino it, why polish a turd? But seat of the pants, I'd say somewhere between 25-35 rwhp. It is what it is, but it an't 50hp!
-
You can bench race and speculate all day. Much better though go take a test ride, and see if you actually like the bike. If you're just looking for impressive specs on paper, Guzzi is not the brand for you. However, if it's a unique and enjoyable riding experience you're after, on great looking, great sounding, lightweight machine, the test ride might just lead to a new Guzzi in the garage. Go ride one! :thewife:
-
I said it before and I'll say it again.... I would bet 90% or more of the motorcycling population can't use all the power the Ninja 250 puts out but insist on buying motorcycles well over a 100 HP.
:bike-037:
+1
I think that HP ratings are more for bragging rites than anything else. That's why I purchase condoms in the magnum size. I know I will never use all of it, but I can bring them out to impress my friends.
-
No, it doesn't run out of steam at 60 and no I don't wish for more, which is why I sold the Guzzi big blocks, and the Buell, and shun the M696 in the fleet.
I've been on a 180 rwhp bike and wished I was on something like a V7, but I'm rarely ever on a V7 wishing the opposite.
The ONLY exception to that is IF my riding was going to be 80+ ALL DAY, yes, I'd probably be more comfortable on a Norge or B11... BUT that's not the type of riding I prefer to do all day.
I should add I rode a little 120+ mile loop yesterday which included the NJ MGNOC lunch. That loop also included two higway stints of about a dozen miles each and the V7 had no problem with 80+ (I'm not going to say how much plus but at one point it was not insignificant)..
I doubt from your description that the KLR would have kept up.
And that is the crux of the matter. If I wasn't so fond of my Mana I'd probably have a V7-II Stone as my 'Touring' bike. Over here when Jude and I go touring we try to avoid freeways and I certainly am not going to be going into full-on loony mode with Jude on the back so why would I need a powerful bike?
I toured all over Europe in the late seventies on a T500 Triumph, sometimes two up. That would of had way less get-up-and-go than a V7 Guzzi but I didn't have an unpleasant time.
Even if I do have to do long Freeway hauling in Oz the freeway limit is 110kph and a V7 will do that all day without blinking but once you are on the smaller byways, apart from the Hay Plains or the long, straight roads in the outback, a V7 is fine.
The reason why you can't get a V7 to perform like another, modern, 750 has been discussed ad nauseam if people can't grasp the simple physics governing it's limitations there is no point in trying to explain.
Pete
-
http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html
ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...
therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...
-
I said it before and I'll say it again.... I would bet 90% or more of the motorcycling population can't use all the power the Ninja 250 puts out but insist on buying motorcycles well over a 100 HP.
Oh well to each their own :bike-037:
Like most things its not about what you need but what you want. 100HP and 160kg is about my yardstick for a road bike, with the emphasis on the weight.
Ciao
-
If Guzzi hadn't made V7's (the modern ones with fuel injection), I would still be riding a BMW airhead. The Guzzi V7 is the closest thing I can find in a modern bike to compare to an airhead and I REALLY liked airheads.
And...the Heron head simplifies the engine. A more complicated design produces more power, but BMW has taken it too far. You can't even work on your own modern BMW cycle now. Thankfully, Guzzi is a little "backward."
Less is more.
-
Here's a link to an article about the Heron head...the good and bad:
http://www.italian.sakura.ne.jp/bad_toys/heronhead/
Peter Y.
Great link, with pictures even I can understand.
-
http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html
ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...
therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...
Ed also doesn't provide you a two year unlimited mileage warranty, doesn't have to meet emission/noise standards, doesn't have to use pump gas, doesn't have to jet/map the fueling to work in a variaty of elevations/temperatures or weather conditions, doesn't have to meet a price point and on and on.
Would you be willing to buy a new bike then have Ed build you a race engine that produces 60+ HP but now you have no warranty, cannot get it inspected due to emission/noise levels, runs on $7 gallon race gas, fueling works in a small geographic location and hand him a blank check to so?
-
I do understand perfectly well that the v7 is a very old design that goes back, well not quite, to the original v7 of 1968(?). That why I was comparing the specs to the older bikes...
I also understand that HP is not all there is to it, and that if you try to pull a truck using a UJM with 200 HP it would simply disintegrate while a Harley with a HP of 45 would pull the truck all day. But I do think it is a relevant measure to guage an engines performance.
Can somebody point me to a thread regarding a succesfully tuned v7?
The bike I ride today has a claimed hp of 36, so I am not a stickler for specs, this is more out of curiosity!
Hi Erik,
In the late '60's and early 70's, manufacturers took a LOT of liberties with the truth. Dynos were few and far between. As mentioned earlier, many measured HP at the crank, where now it's more common to measure at the brake (called Brake Horsepower or BHP). Still, I'd doubt that early V7 put 70 HP out anywhere other than the brochure. Likely, it produced a fair bit less power and torque than a newer model. Even with the new model being a "retro classic" with basic brakes and suspension, those new components, as lacking as they may be, are MUCH better than what was available in 1970.
Here is a thread from a year or so ago that offers a few clues: http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=70895.0
Check out Guzzipower.com. He's said to have pulled 50 HP out of a V7.
Hope that answers your questions.
FYI, though I know this wasn't a part of what you're asking, I agree with the comments that one would be better off addressing suspension on these things before power. Those who say hop-ups on a V7 are a waste are correct, if it isn't what they want. If it's the bike that would make you happy, go for it.
-
Those who say hop-ups on a V7 are a waste are correct, if it isn't what they want. If it's the bike that would make you happy, go for it.
THIS...
OP - if you REALLY want to hop up a V7, talk to Ed at GuzziPower.
Be prepared to spend.
-
Even if I do have to do long Freeway hauling in Oz the freeway limit is 110kph and a V7 will do that all day without blinking but once you are on the smaller byways, apart from the Hay Plains or the long, straight roads in the outback, a V7 is fine.
Pete
I'm about to be reminded how well the V7 (the Special this time), does the long, straight roads - heading to Broken Hill on Thursday. Will let you know. Looks like we missed the tornado that hit Dubbo yesterday.
Mal
-
Back in the early 70's, I had a Honda 350 CL with the side pipes. It would wheelie with a bit of clutch and flat out on the 91 freeway in my best Rollie Free pose, it would pull 100 mph. I rode that bike all over California, it had enough power for me back then, and with the tires of the 70's, you would not have wanted more. I paid my friend $50 for it as it had died in his garage, I gave him an extra $25 when it started with a new battery. I beat it like a red headed step child for 4 years and never saw a change in performance. I pull a trailer with a surfboard on in, and rode it to Nor Cal from Orange County. Finally sold it for $325. Perhaps the best bike I ever had. My maintenance costs. After I filed all the way through the points, I had to put new points on, also, the pot metal shift lever snapped off in big bear, used vice grips for a month then got a shift lever. That was the parts I added in 4 years other than maintenance... My eldo was much the same, if only it had the drum brakes the Honda had :evil:
-
I will reinforce about "claimed HP" back in the day. As someone stated the T-3 stats claimed 68 HP. Considering drivetrain loss, should net around the upper 50s, right?
My T-3 motor has the 1,000cc kit, V-7 Sport cam, 36mm round slides, heads ported, HD valve springs. I did have it dyno measured and it came out to a bit over 56 HP and 53 lbs of torque. So I would say the brochure HP was very optimistic.
(http://i710.photobucket.com/albums/ww107/jpeters16/DSCN0483.jpg) (http://s710.photobucket.com/user/jpeters16/media/DSCN0483.jpg.html)
GliderJohn
-
Can somebody point me to a thread regarding a succesfully tuned v7?
If you are just looking for a succesfully tuned V7, I have it. My '13 has been dyno tuned and re-flashed. The bike runs great. This took the RWHP from 39.57 to......(drum beat)...41.86. Torque from 39.26 to 39.04. In other words, not a significant change on either hp or torque. If you change the air intake you'll probably see the numbers go down. I have posted the actual dyno graph on earlier threads so these are not seat of the pants figures. The real benefit of all this is just an air/fuel ratio that is more consistent across the rev range and a bike that seems to run smoother. It's still limited by the Heron head.
Peter Y.
-
No, it doesn't run out of steam at 60 and no I don't wish for more, which is why I sold the Guzzi big blocks, and the Buell, and shun the M696 in the fleet.
I've been on a 180 rwhp bike and wished I was on something like a V7, but I'm rarely ever on a V7 wishing the opposite.
The ONLY exception to that is IF my riding was going to be 80+ ALL DAY, yes, I'd probably be more comfortable on a Norge or B11... BUT that's not the type of riding I prefer to do all day.
I should add I rode a little 120+ mile loop yesterday which included the NJ MGNOC lunch. That loop also included two higway stints of about a dozen miles each and the V7 had no problem with 80+ (I'm not going to say how much plus but at one point it was not insignificant)..
I doubt from your description that the KLR would have kept up.
Maybe I should rephrase. The KLR does not accelerate judiciously above 60. It will indicate 95-100 but above 80 it's a slow crawl. It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration. The Norge on the other hand will pull like a freight train above 80. The point wasn't to knock your V7. I'm fantasizing about owning a v7 sport myself. I was explaining the difference between torque and HP and where you might be left wanting for more horsepower. Around town driving and country roads don't require a lot of ponies. At higher speeds, total energy output (HP) becomes important as drag increases. Finally, I don't think anyone "needs" more that 40-50HP. I'm in no way insinuating that your V7 is inadequate. It's just not an interstate locomotive partly because of the lack of horsepower.
This discussion reminds me of my Audiophile days. The Brit-fi guys would claim that most people don't need more than 25w and that wattage was irrelevant anyway. Granted, their little Naim amps punched above their weight and their speakers were sensitive. However when people started putting them in American sized living rooms they would run out of steam if they had to fill said room with Carl Orff's O'fortuna which by the way is awesome interstate driving music;)
-
Like most things its not about what you need but what you want. 100HP and 160kg is about my yardstick for a road bike, with the emphasis on the weight.
Ciao
352 LBS , are you sure ?
Dusty
-
FOR THE READER'S DIGEST VERSION - just READ THE BOLD
I was explaining the difference between torque and HP and where you might be left wanting for more horsepower. Around town driving and country roads don't require a lot of ponies. At higher speeds, total energy output (HP) becomes important as drag increases. Finally, I don't think anyone "needs" more that 40-50HP. I'm in no way insinuating that your V7 is inadequate. It's just not an interstate locomotive partly because of the lack of horsepower.
Ya know, if you'd put this in your post first, I'd probably not bothered to write my reply below lol because the last sentence says it all. My reply should just be "YEAh, I get that, no duh". or something to that effect.
I'm not arguing against that in any way, shape, or form.
I was explaining that I don't generally NEED OR WANT AN INTERSTATE locomotive.
I'll add that another reason the V7 isn't one is because of the diminutive size it gets blown around easier than a B11, Norge, even Sportster.
Now, that said, I already wrote all this crap, I might as well post it cause I'm a bit of spec geek:
Maybe I should rephrase. The KLR does not accelerate judiciously above 60. It will indicate 95-100 but above 80 it's a slow crawl. It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration. The Norge on the other hand will pull like a freight train above 80. The point wasn't to knock your V7.
To be clear, it's all good. I'm not taking any offense or even hearing any insinuations of inadequacy of my bikes lol.
I wonder if you might be missing the hp and torque differences between the V7 and KLR (only 8% more hp but 28% more torque), so I suspect the V7 has a bit more punch. A slightly quicker 1/4 mile confirms that, but it's an rch, so I'm sure they're overall more similar than dis-similar.
That said, if I'm already doing 65-70, I do downshift one gear if I want a quick pass on the highway.
Reminder of the data
V7 444# wet, 39 rwhp (MCN, I've seen 41 by Motorcyclist) / 41 ft. lbs.
KLR 433# wet, 36 rwhp (MCN) / 32 ft. lbs.
Now, about this:
It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration.
Uh, no, no it won't (unless you're talking the 883, then unless it's a Stage I that might be true)
KLR - 0-60 5.88 seconds, 1/4 14.40
Sportys - 0-60 3.99-5.32 seconds, 1/4 12.25-13.69
And we should remember that Sportys (like all Harleys) are purposely strangled when the leave the factory. Moreso than any other brand I've seen, opening them up with an air cleaner, pipes, and tune, brings significant gains (10-20%).
But none of this really matters. I think we're just talking two different ways around a square. Do you want to get there on the highway, or do you want to get there via backroads. I have no problem droning highways if I have to, but that's literally my last choice to get anywhere on a cycle cause it's not as much fun and misses the point FOR ME.
And I've droned highways clear across this country from coast-to-coast when I HAD TO. I just don't like to HAVE TO.
Again, I had a B11, an R1100, a 100 rwhp Buell etc. I've had access to demos, press bikes, etc. for weeks at a time.
I've got 10's of thousands of miles on bikes that fight a couple of divisions above the V7 and hundreds of thousands of miles on bikes that still punch above the V7.
Hell, if I want to feel the difference between HP and Torque I just have to hop on the M696
M696 - 408# wet, 68 hp / 44 ft. lbs. (<---torque not the MCN figure of 30 ft. lbs. which doesn't agree with most dyno sheets).
But again, I know which bike I'm going to choose 90% of the time.
And IF I need to do hours on the highway, my Sportster is probably best suited of the current fleet. Yeah, it's slower than my B11, but it's not significant, and I prefer the overall riding position/comfort/amenities of the Sporty (not to mention it won't try to cook me on hot days).
B11 - 562# wet, 75 rwhp (FBF Dyno before Guzzitech reflash) / 58 ft. lbs.
1200Lr - ~585# wet, ~64 hp / 70 ft. lbs.
The 1200Lr is a tad slower than the B11 and probably geared slightly lower, but it does the job nicely solo or 2-up.
Actually the more I think about this, my problems with the B11 were NOT that I didn't like the chassis or the power, it came down almost exclusively to the ergonomics/riding position and the amount of heat it put off to the rider in hot weather. Plus I never really fell in love with the cosmetics. IF IT HAD LOOKED MORE LIKE MY V7, with similar ergos, had a metal tank, and didn't give off that heat, I might still have it.
Then again, it did tempt me to be riding faster and faster on the highway, which is something I don't need.
Ok, not sure my point anymore...maybe it's just that the V7 is just fine the way it is for me.
I get the people who want more power in something like that, actually I think they really screwed up not making the Racer a 4V head, maybe slightly bigger displacement, dual disc version of the V7... but I'm still not sure I would have chosen it for MYSELF. And it's a moot point, because they DIDN'T.
Oh, I should add one more thing I LOVE about my V7 - it regularly gets 50-55 mpg, while that B11 used to get more like 40-45.
-
Too much (http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/deadhorse_zpspkezbtqs.gif) my brain hurts!
Time to take a break and go for a little ride, guys!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/shetlands_zpst0lkozeo.jpg)
:wink:
-
However, if it's a unique and enjoyable riding experience you're after, on great looking, great sounding, lightweight machine, the test ride might just lead to a new Guzzi in the garage. Go ride one!
I had some extra time a few weeks back , and tried a V70II. I was skeptical about the 49 hp. And I thought that it was going to be geared very short (high rev's on the expressway). But it was a head-turner. Plenty of torque available to have loads of fun, and geared much taller than I had assumed.
You really should make your way to a dealer and take one for a test drive.
On another note, a test drive on the new Ducati Scrambler was an eye-opener also!
-
Too much (http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/deadhorse_zpspkezbtqs.gif) my brain hurts!
Time to take a break and go for a little ride, guys!
(http://i1299.photobucket.com/albums/ag77/Penderic/shetlands_zpst0lkozeo.jpg)
:wink:
Awww , those guys are about the cutest thing ever .
Dusty
-
And a lot cheaper to feed, move around and clean up after too!
-
And a lot cheaper to feed, move around and clean up after too!
Unless one turns them into a house pet :laugh:
Dusty
-
I've ridden old 70s Hondas pretty much my whole life (with a couple of exceptions), and now ride a V7 Special.
I've ridden 6 hours straight with my wife on the back at 140-145 km/h.
I've had it up to an indicated 185.
After 6500 km, the seat is comfy and the suspension nice and compliant... corners beautifully.
Plenty of passing power. Accelerates nicely, and is an all around pleasure to ride.
If you want to come flying into corners at top speed, jam on the brakes and dive into the apex... knock yourself out, but why do you want to convert an old school tourer into that? There's plenty of those out there.
-
Back in the early 70's, I had a Honda 350 CL with the side pipes. It would wheelie with a bit of clutch and flat out on the 91 freeway in my best Rollie Free pose, it would pull 100 mph.
I remember when I was young, riding small bikes, looking at a Honda 350 and thinking "Wow, that's a real bike. It must have some real speed."
God, how things have changed. I went to a Guzzi dealer a few years ago in Worcester, Ma, and they were selling Breva 750s as beginner bikes. Man, in my day a 750 was a big bike. It was all the power you ever needed.
Hey, Pirsig (Zen and ...) rode 1/2 way across the country on a Honda 305.
And he did it two up with camping gear, bitches.
-
I just got my V7 Stone last week. Have you seen it yet?
(http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc57/bpreynolds/V7%20Stone/image.jpg1_zpsshbuhlxq.jpg) (http://s212.photobucket.com/user/bpreynolds/media/V7%20Stone/image.jpg1_zpsshbuhlxq.jpg.html)
I'm sorry, was there some discussion here about horsepower? :boozing:
-
Hey, BP,
You better get those stickers off the tank and fender, or you're
going to spend a long time trying to take them off. The longer
they're on, the more the glue sets.
I spent at least 2 hours getting those blasted stickers off my
2009 V7 Classic (now gone).
My V7 II Stone will be here next Monday or Tuesday. I can
hardly wait. I'm like a kid at Christmas. (I have a red one).
Jim
-
Hey, BP,
You better get those stickers off the tank and fender, or you're
going to spend a long time trying to take them off. The longer
they're on, the more the glue sets.
I spent at least 2 hours getting those blasted stickers off my
2009 V7 Classic (now gone).
My V7 II Stone will be here next Monday or Tuesday. I can
hardly wait. I'm like a kid at Christmas. (I have a red one).
Jim
Hah! After doing a small bit of research it seemed like guys had some of the best luck using a steamer so out ours came. Yup. All gone now (pic taken last week) and took about 20 minutes tops for all of them - four or five, I think. Even took the ones off the shocks. :afro:
Congrats on the bike. Welcome to Kidville.
-
Several years back there was an article about a HD RK Evolution series . The owner , a famous journo , asked his HD mechanic buddy about modding the engine . The mechanic told him to quit worrying about the lack of HP and just ride the thing , if the engineers had intended for it to be a hot rod , they would have built a hot rod :laugh:
Dusty
-
Several years back there was an article about a HD RK Evolution series . The owner , a famous journo , asked his HD mechanic buddy about modding the engine . The mechanic told him to quit worrying about the lack of HP and just ride the thing , if the engineers had intended for it to be a hot rod , they would have built a hot rod :laugh:
Dusty
HD's respond very nicely to mild uncorking. And stock or in that mild Stage I trim they are very reliable.
The easiest way to make them UBER unreliable is to start hot rodding them!!!
-
HD's respond very nicely to mild uncorking. And stock or in that mild Stage I trim they are very reliable.
The easiest way to make them UBER unreliable is to start hot rodding them!!!
UBER
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :l
Sorry , that German word always makes me laugh .
Dusty
-
I just got my V7 Stone last week. Have you seen it yet?
(http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc57/bpreynolds/V7%20Stone/image.jpg1_zpsshbuhlxq.jpg) (http://s212.photobucket.com/user/bpreynolds/media/V7%20Stone/image.jpg1_zpsshbuhlxq.jpg.html)
I'm sorry, was there some discussion here about horsepower? :boozing:
Love that color. Nice looking bike..
-
The current "small-block" 750 goes back to around '77, starting as a 500. The V65 didn't have to meet as stringent of emissions or noise standards, so less hp loss to that. All production 2 valve per cylinder small-blocks have Heron heads.
Moto Morini 250, 350 and 500 v-twins (and a few late singles built from the twins) also have Heron heads, though they seem to have done better with it. Guzzi could have learned a few leassons from Morini IMO.
Speaking of Moto Morini, I can't help thinking how they missed the boat when they could have had a game changer: instead of having a rubber belt driving the cam and then the pushrods to an heron head, 'all' they had to do is put the rubber belt to an OHC head -Eh voila! A Ducati Pantah engine born at least 5 years earlier. That design saved Ducati, Morini was so close...
-
Much appreciated, Chuck. I'm enjoying the crap out of it. Guess I once was one of those guys who thought the bike needed more power. Until I bought one and rode it for more than 20 miles.
-
UBER
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :l
Sorry , that German word always makes me laugh .
Dusty
I thought it would appeal to your BMW side.
-
http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html
ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...
therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...
The current V7 puts out 53hp without going to any engineering effort at all. They just had to see the guys in the marketing department.
It's a shame someone didn't tell Ed Milich. ;-)
-
Hah! After doing a small bit of research it seemed like guys had some of the best luck using a steamer so out ours came. Yup. All gone now (pic taken last week) and took about 20 minutes tops for all of them - four or five, I think. Even took the ones off the shocks. :afro:
Hair dryer is all you need for removing stickers that are fresh.
-
I am not a HP fanatic, actually quite the opposite! I do Think that 70 hp above is all any sensible person will ever need in a bike.
But I am a manic mechanic in the sense that I can't ride anything that I haven't personally screwed around with - for me there is no satisfaction to an Engine I don't know how it looks like on the inside.
But it might be stupid to get a new shiny v7 just to tear it apart.
What about an older v50 or v35? Anybody have experience in tuning those?
-
I am not a HP fanatic, actually quite the opposite! I do Think that 70 hp above is all any sensible person will ever need in a bike.
But I am a manic mechanic in the sense that I can't ride anything that I haven't personally screwed around with - for me there is no satisfaction to an Engine I don't know how it looks like on the inside.
But it might be stupid to get a new shiny v7 just to tear it apart.
What about an older v50 or v35? Anybody have experience in tuning those?
I think you need to call Ed Milich and GuzziPower
http://www.guzzipower.com/
(http://www.guzzipower.com/images/splash/splash2.png)
http://www.guzzipower.com/store/Headwork.html
http://www.guzzipower.com/store/Sumspacer.html
http://www.guzzipower.com/store/V7bigbore.html
Drop him an email explaining what you want to talk about.
ed@guzzipower.com
We can banter back and forth all day, but he has more practical experience with what you're talking about than anyone here.
-
Hair dryer is all you need for removing stickers that are fresh.
That's the cool thing about the steamer, it sorta rehydrates old and dried on stickers to make them more elastic again - I had at least 2 or 3 come off all in one piece even.
http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html
ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...
therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...
If someone were to ask me if I'd like an additional 15 HP even on my Stone I'd have to ask why. And while this bike is certainly stirring me in many other ways aside from efficiency and tank range, if that bump in hp came at the cost of lessening either of those, I'd most certainly say NO THANKS. I have a Thunderbird Sport that is highly modified and - when running :grin: - turns near 90hp at the rear wheel so I have that aspect of riding covered.
As stated earlier, I only have about 490ish miles on mine now, so maybe my views will ultimately change but for now they have greatly surprised and pleased even me.
-
I dared to reopen this thread, since it's quite interesting. Look, it's like in car engines (at least in Europe)... everybody started to manufacture smaller engines with a lot of horsepower. Take a look at Renault for example. They are making 900cc engine with 90HP!! Do you remember when 1900cc VW TDI engine had 90HP? Or Audi for example... todays 1.6 TDI with 105HP. Emission regulation is a b**ch. Mercedes on the other hand is still using 2.2 liter engines. The problem nowadays is that these small engines are not made to last very long. Have you ever heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence)? Engines are getting so small (and I mean literally) that metal fatigue will show up sooner or later. Since these designs are relatively new... time will tell. And you know what? It is similar in all other fields. You never had a feeling that some old thing was much better than new one?
What I want to point out is that Guzzi's 750 Heron head engine is from times when it was designed to last. That's why it is simple. That's why it is close to people. More complex engine, higher the possibility that something will go wrong. It runs "slowly" but reliably.
-
Yeah... a VW 1.9 TDI will only go 250,000 + miles. Darn junk. :wink:
-
I dared to reopen this thread, since it's quite interesting. Look, it's like in car engines (at least in Europe)... everybody started to manufacture smaller engines with a lot of horsepower. Take a look at Renault for example. They are making 900cc engine with 90HP!! Do you remember when 1900cc VW TDI engine had 90HP? Or Audi for example... todays 1.6 TDI with 105HP. Emission regulation is a b**ch. Mercedes on the other hand is still using 2.2 liter engines. The problem nowadays is that these small engines are not made to last very long. Have you ever heard of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence)? Engines are getting so small (and I mean literally) that metal fatigue will show up sooner or later. Since these designs are relatively new... time will tell. And you know what? It is similar in all other fields. You never had a feeling that some old thing was much better than new one?
What I want to point out is that Guzzi's 750 Heron head engine is from times when it was designed to last. That's why it is simple. That's why it is close to people. More complex engine, higher the possibility that something will go wrong. It runs "slowly" but reliably.
Waxi, you are right on target.
Joe