Cal II vs 1000SP

[T4halo]

I currently have my 70 Ambassador as my daily rider with my 83 Cal II as a back up. I’m lusting over a 1000SP and wonder what your thoughts are on selling the California and picking up a SP. Anyone have both and have an opinion?

Thanks, Tony

[spmoto]

I've had both and there like apples to oranges. Aside from the obvious similarity of power train they are VERY  different. Be nice to ride an SP to be sure the lust is warranted.
SM

[BillinPA]

I owned a Cal II for approx 15 years, I liked it, but never truly bonded with it. I personally love the SP. I haven't owned one but the bike I have owned the longest...my EV, almost got traded with a friend for an SP. I would have loved the SP, but couldn't part with the EV.

I realize this probably doesnt help, but it does make me want an SP.

[Chuck in Indiana]

The SP is quite a bit "sportier" than the touring oriented Cal II. I prefer the SP. Different strokes and all that.

[Lannis]

Completely different bikes.   I've met a FEW people who have liked them both equally, but not many.

I've had both.   The only trouble with the SP (whether it be an SP-NT, an SP-II, or SP-III) is that many people, like me, cannot ride with their legs behind the fairing where they belong- there's not enough room.   On the SP-NT, you can remove the fairing lowers, and lose both the obstacle and the protection, which many people do.   On the SP-III, I don't think you can do that.

We wanted an SP-III really bad, tried it 2-up, and didn't fit ... So it was an SP-NT without the lowers for us.

Lannis

[Two Checks]

I'll echo what Lannis said. I have both A SP II and a Cal III Touring.
I'm only 5' 8" and my knees hit the fairing. Under hard braking I did find it beneficial to use that "feature". The Cal III is a more relaxed ride and, for me, easier to ride hard due to the wider tiller style (a friend calls em goat ropers) bars. Both fairings are pretty good. The Cal is roomier.

[Chuck in Indiana]

Ahem. Properly sized people fit the SP "just" right.  Perfect grip on the tank with knee pads just touching the fairing.

[Cdn850T5NT]

Completely different bikes.   I've met a FEW people who have liked them both equally, but not many.

I've had both.   The only trouble with the SP (whether it be an SP-NT, an SP-II, or SP-III) is that many people, like me, cannot ride with their legs behind the fairing where they belong- there's not enough room.   On the SP-NT, you can remove the fairing lowers, and lose both the obstacle and the protection, which many people do.   On the SP-III, I don't think you can do that.

We wanted an SP-III really bad, tried it 2-up, and didn't fit ... So it was an SP-NT without the lowers for us.

Lannis

It looks like you're calling the (original) 1000 SP an SP-NT... I suppose it's arguable but I think NT is Nuovo Telaio... not Nuovo Tipo (telaio being "frame" and there is I suppose nothing "nuovo tipo" about the original SP). It was the 1000 SP II that actually has the new frame... taller, back-gussetted head-tube.

Just nit-picking, sorry ☺.

[Two Checks]

Quote from: Chuck in Indiana on Today at 11:09:10 AM

Ahem. Properly sized people fit the SP "just" right.  Perfect grip on the tank with knee pads just touching the fairing.

Then properly sized people have to be pretty short. I'm 5-8 and my knees hit it.

Then I would think they would have a different problem....touching the ground.

[Lannis]

It looks like you're calling the (original) 1000 SP an SP-NT... I suppose it's arguable but I think NT is Nuovo Telaio... not Nuovo Tipo (telaio being "frame" and there is I suppose nothing "nuovo tipo" about the original SP). It was the 1000 SP II that actually has the new frame... taller, back-gussetted head-tube.

Just nit-picking, sorry ☺.

No problem ... I've always just lumped the 78-79 "1000SP" and the 80-83 "SPNT" together when it comes to riding position and fairings because they're so similar.    All that changed with the SPII and SPIII ...

Lannis

[Groover]

The California II also has the long swing arm so take that into account for handling on top of riding position.


I've never ridden either, so that's all I have to throw in the mix.


Good luck.

[Cdn850T5NT]

No problem ... I've always just lumped the 78-79 "1000SP" and the 80-83 "SPNT" together when it comes to riding position and fairings because they're so similar.    All that changed with the SPII and SPIII ...

Lannis

Didn't know the 80-83 were different. Can you recall in which significant ways?

[Lannis]

Didn't know the 80-83 were different. Can you recall in which significant ways?

There was a change to the fairing louvers, it had a better, longer seat, and they moved the back footpegs.   And it had different silencers, as I found when I tried an earlier set of mufflers on my '83 and found about an inch difference in them ....

There may be other changes, SP experts will know ....

Lannis

[Denis]

I think for the SPIIs Guzzi took the time to spread out the lower fairings at the back a little more so that there was a little more room for the knees. And I think that means the upper mounts for the lowers are slightly different.
I THINK.

[s1120]

I gotta say I do love the looks of the SP's.. sadly at 6'3" tall, and almost 36" inseam, Im guessing its sadly not a option for me... 

[larrys]

I bought a '83 SP new and kept it for nineteen years and 70K miles. Made my arms and shoulders hurt til I put bar-backs on it. Front end was a bit flexy with two-up and loaded bags and tank bag, a fork brace fixed that. Had the soft clutch hub, replaced that at 30K miles. I liked it then, today I would rather ride a Cal II. Rode a few back in the day when I wrenched on Guzzis, they felt like a longer, plusher G5. My Cal 1100 works for me today.
Larry

[Denis]

I bought a '83 SP new and kept it for nineteen years and 70K miles. Made my arms and shoulders hurt til I put bar-backs on it. Front end was a bit flexy with two-up and loaded bags and tank bag, a fork brace fixed that. Had the soft clutch hub, replaced that at 30K miles. I liked it then, today I would rather ride a Cal II. Rode a few back in the day when I wrenched on Guzzis, they felt like a longer, plusher G5. My Cal 1100 works for me today.
Larry

For the SPIIs, Guzzi used 38mm forks. I bought mine new and never felt those were flexy. I always felt it was a huge improvement. The handlebars on the SPs work well for me, but it could be a height thing. They make me lean a little forward without putting too much weight on my hands.

[huub]

pretty different bikes , a california is a relaxed back road cruiser and becomes a handfull at high speed, in comparison a SP is sportier, feels more at home on fast highway eating miles.
the fairing is amazingly effective at high speed.
personally i had no problems fitting behind the SP fairing ( 1.85 meter , 6"1'') it just forces you in a seating position with your bum half way down the seat.
i have no problems fitting behind the le mans 2 fairing either , it shares the same fairing lowers
if you want to do a 500 miles high speed trip, it is hard to beat the SP.
it is the only bike i had where i could do a couple of hours at 100 MPH plus riding, and still arrive relaxed.
try the same speeds with the V7sport or my bevel 900SS, and you will arrive completely knackered.
for urban traffic and small roads the SP might feel a bit top heavy,

personally i would prefer the SP over the cali, as you've already got the ambassador as a back road cruiser.

[ozarquebus]

I have a 87 1000 SP II I would trade for a Convert if you haven't tried one.

[Tom]

My '80 SP1000NT is a great tourer for one.  The fairing w/lowers gives good protection in inclement weather.  Hard for me to think of getting rid of it.  Personal dilemma.     I've flopping between sending the SP or the Cal 1400T to Hawaii.