Weird choice of tug - Guzzi content

[bettythebear]

Seems like a weird choice as a starting point

https://austin.craigslist.org/mcy/d/austin-2013-moto-guzzi-v7-racer-sidecar/7360403215.html

[Rick4003]

Why? Not all side cars are meant to be highway rockets. I think it looks like a very nice little outfit. I would not say that a Ural is a vastly better choice of tug than a V7 is, but that is used almost exclusively as a tug.

[tazio]

I ran a Velorex sidecar on a 1989 Sportster for 2 years. Some of the purest form of "fun" I've ever experienced motorcycling!
They are " the ultimate compromise ",
though I wouldn't have traded the experience for anything.

[Dirk_S]

Jay at DMC said he’s not done a ton of V7 conversions, but quite a few.

The 2013 V7 actually puts out the same torque as the Ural (albeit at a little higher revs @ 5k rpm vs the Ural @ 4.2 k, I believe. And, it puts out at least 6-7 more ponies. Combine those numbers with the fact the Guzzi is lighter with not as much steel bearing down on the bike, the rig should pull decently when mated to a likewise lighter rig.

Benefits to the Guzzi V7 as a tug—shaft drive, no doubt, and cylinders that are probably even easier than a boxer twin to get to when servicing the valves with the car still attached.

Things that aren’t in the Guzzi’s favor—telescopic forks instead of leading link, making trail longer and thus harder to steer (but in line with so many other solo bikes out there), and a stress member frame that is not quite as rigid to install mounting points as cradle frames.

I’m currently riding an F800GS mated with a custom car made by a Ural dealer near me. Looks like the tub started out as a Velorex. The GS can absolutely pull this thing easily at highway speed, but the steering is more of a bear than the Ural was due to rocking telescopic forks.

Due to spatial constraints (single guy living downtown in a small city with no garages), I’m thinking about selling the GS as a solo bike and pairing the tub with my 2016 V7II.

[bettythebear]

I suppose it just struck me as odd that they changed out to higher/wider bars, but left the racer rear sets on.

[cliffrod]

I like it but wonder about gearing. 

We considered putting a sidecar on the R69S before it went away. But even though it made more hp than a regular R60/2, the taller gearing of the R69S made it less viable to pull a sidecar.

[Dirk_S]

I suppose it just struck me as odd that they changed out to higher/wider bars, but left the racer rear sets on.

Ha, I see. At the very least, it’s a functional change up front. Trying to turn a sidecar rig with sporty bars would’ve required Hulk strength!

I like it but wonder about gearing. 

We considered putting a sidecar on the R69S before it went away. But even though it made more hp than a regular R60/2, the taller gearing of the R69S made it less viable to pull a sidecar.

I read about another person who put a car on their V7, and they wrote that they felt bad for the engine. If you listen to a Ural rolling at 65+ mph in only 4th as its top gear, it’s also high-rev’ing. I figure having a fifth (or a sixth with the V7II and up), in addition to reduced weight, probably helps a tiny bit, I’d imagine? Those torque numbers don’t seem too far different, but I admit I’m in deeper waters with understanding that stuff.