What's your preferred engine size?

[faffi]

All thing else being equal, let's say a wet motorcycle weight of 500 lbs and 60 hp from the engine, the engine being of typical Guzzi design (air cooled V-twin), what capacity would you prefer?

Realistically, the engine would need a capacity of at least 450 cc to reliably deliver 60 hp, but it could also be ten time as big if someone prefer. Ignore the obvious, that a larger engine would be heavier, just imagine it would not. Basically, would you want a screaming 450 or a loping 2-liter or something in between?

[auzziguzzi]

All thing else being equal, let's say a wet motorcycle weight of 500 lbs and 60 hp from the engine, the engine being of typical Guzzi design (air cooled V-twin), what capacity would you prefer?

Realistically, the engine would need a capacity of at least 450 cc to reliably deliver 60 hp, but it could also be ten time as big if someone prefer. Ignore the obvious, that a larger engine would be heavier, just imagine it would not. Basically, would you want a screaming 450 or a loping 2-liter or something in between?

For solo riding, a 650cc air-cooled, 90º, V-twin.

For two up riding with luggage, a 1000cc, air-cooled, 90º, V-twin.

Since your parameters state that both bikes weigh 500 lbs and each has 60 hp and both are air-cooled, there is nothing to separate them, there.

However, the bigger engine would be higher geared, lower revving with more torque.
It would engender a more leisurely feel to the day's riding. 

The 650 would be higher revving and more sporty with most likely a smoother power delivery, remembering that both are 60 hp.  It would be a sweet motorcycle.

[Kev m]

In my heart motorcycle engines should be air-cooled and about 1000cc give or take a couple hundred at most.

Once it meets or passes 1.5L it starts to feel like an exercise in excess.

I understand how emissions standards and marketing have pushed size and power, but my last Harley had more displacement than at least one car I've owned and that's dumb.

It's one of the many reasons I'm personally embracing the smallblocks as a comparative exercise in "minimalism" without all the work of actual minimalism and having to worry about getting run over on a T125 or a Grom.

[guzzisteve]

Screaming 450/550's didn't set well for Aprillia, putting out 80+ hp. Owners failed to listen to the engine & pistons flipped. Last ones you got 2 for 1 price.

[SIR REAL ED]

All thing else being equal, let's say a wet motorcycle weight of 500 lbs and 60 hp from the engine, the engine being of typical Guzzi design (air cooled V-twin), what capacity would you prefer?

Realistically, the engine would need a capacity of at least 450 cc to reliably deliver 60 hp, but it could also be ten time as big if someone prefer. Ignore the obvious, that a larger engine would be heavier, just imagine it would not. Basically, would you want a screaming 450 or a loping 2-liter or something in between?

I think the state of tune of the engine would be more influential than engine size.  That and intended usage. 

I remember 35 years ago, getting off my Suzuki GS1000G and getting on a friend's Kawasaki Ninja 500 and being astounded by the wide powerband, low end torque, and top end horsepower of that puny 500. Of course, that is apples to oranges, a 1970's two valve air cooled motor vs a 1980's four valve water cooled motor.

For where I ride and how I ride, 500 lbs is 100 lbs more than I prefer.  Still hard to beat a Suzuki DR650 for versatility.

Based on my buying history, I have owned a lot of 650's.

Although, I think the Royal Enfield 650 twins might fit the bill.  The parallel twin with a 270 degree crank feels very similar to a 90 degree V-Twin.  IIRC, someone makes a 865cc kit, in case 650cc doesn't cut it.

If superchargers ever come into the production world (electric powered, and activated by button or voice command?), I suspect 350cc engines might just surprise a lot of people.

[SIR REAL ED]

Screaming 450/550's didn't set well for Aprillia, putting out 80+ hp. Owners failed to listen to the engine & pistons flipped. Last ones you got 2 for 1 price.

Yep!  I bought 2 for 1 in 2012.  One of the most amazing, exciting motorcycles ever made. Mind blowing if not quite practical styling. 

All it needed was a total engine teardown and rebuild by a master like Allan Noland before you started it.  Then keep your eye on the oil level and change it often (no oil control rings on the pistons), and you had a very reliable bike.

3 or 4 simple design changes upfront, followed by not allowing drunk people to assemble the bike, and those engines would have changed motorcycling for a lot of people.

I think the closest modern equivalent in terms of riding excitement would be a KTM Duke 690.

[Huzo]

These days, 900 - 1200 cc.
I’d settle for an even 1000.

[Perazzimx14]

Parameters are a air cooled transverse V-twin engine producing 60hp in a bike weighting in at 500lbs and the amount of CC's would not effect weight or performance. Since CC's have no effect this is sort picking a sticker for the side panel.

[faffi]

Parameters are a air cooled transverse V-twin engine producing 60hp in a bike weighting in at 500lbs and the amount of CC's would not effect weight or performance. Since CC's have no effect this is sort picking a sticker for the side panel.

CC would alter torque and the revs needed to make 60hp.

[guzzisteve]

Yep!  I bought 2 for 1 in 2012.  One of the most amazing, exciting motorcycles ever made. Mind blowing if not quite practical styling. 

All it needed was a total engine teardown and rebuild by a master like Allan Noland before you started it.  Then keep your eye on the oil level and change it often (no oil control rings on the pistons), and you had a very reliable bike.

3 or 4 simple design changes upfront, followed by not allowing drunk people to assemble the bike, and those engines would have changed motorcycling for a lot of people.

I think the closest modern equivalent in terms of riding excitement would be a KTM Duke 690.

They came in restricted & had to be un so they would go faster than 15mph, cut stuff out of exhaust & install a tune. Piaggio tour truck came one year with a road race bike w/250 frame & 450 motor in it, cool bike.

[johnwesley]

I like an engine that pulls good without having to wring its neck. So I would want a larger capacity engine, say 1000-1100. That said a smaller engine if the midrange was there would be fine. Typically a larger engine with the same hp is under less strain and therefore lives a longer life as well. So let’s just keep to 1000-1100cc

[MGrego]

500 lbs, 60hp ?

Sounds like my 04 Triumph Bonneville T100.  Parallel Twin 790 CC.

[SIR REAL ED]

They came in restricted & had to be un so they would go faster than 15mph, cut stuff out of exhaust & install a tune. Piaggio tour truck came one year with a road race bike w/250 frame & 450 motor in it, cool bike.

I remember the 48mm (?) throttle body butterflies didn't even open enough to allow a 1/4" ball bearing to pass.  All the experts said "Don't even start it!  Take it to Allan immediately!"  I disobeyed.  Even in restricted form it would still throttle only wheelie easily.

Another Achilles heel was the oil soluble sealant they used on the engine cases!  Red not black stuff IIRC.

[Bulldog9]

I bought my first 'adult' street bike in 1986. In the years that have passed, all but 4 have been liter+

Yamaha XS 750 & 650 - Moto Guzzi V7ii & Breva 750. Of those, the only one I REALLY like is the V7ii.....

So, I guess you could say I prefer Liter +.  I had an MGX 21, and found it too big. I had an FJR 1300 and liked it but it became boring unless I was riding at go to jail or morgue speeds.

I loved my FZ1 and C10 Concours, and absolutely love my 1000 Convert,  1100 Griso, 1200 Norge, so to dial it in, between 1000 & 1200 CC is my preferred engine size. Will be interesting to see how the 853cc V85 jives with me. I think it will be mighty FINE..........

[faffi]

I would not have minded a 2-liter engine geared to turn 2000 rpm @ 60 mph.

My Mongrel fitted with a Virago 1100 engine makes a claimed 62hp and so comes pretty close to what the majority so far have asked for, apart from it not being a Guzzi. The Yamaha engine is more satifying in every functional way than the V9 in my Roamer, but the difference is not miles apart.

[Ncdan]

A decade ago I was on a 900 pounder.
The last few years 650lb.
Now waiting for the spring delivery of a V50 coming from Maine. I think, what 400+or -?

[Dukedesmo]

Ideally around 900-1,000cc with 2 cylinders which all my bikes are.


I consider the optimum size of a cylinder for a 'proper' power delivery is around 500cc (+/-50cc) - not keen on small capacity i4 engines.


I try to stick to this 'rule' where possible with both bikes and cars and, infact my 3 bikes and 2 cars all have cylinder sizes between 450-500cc.

[blu guzz]

my old r100rs was around 60 hp and a little over 500 lbs and was very satisfying in the midrange at the time.  it would shoot from about 50 to 90 pretty fast.

[TN Mark]

For the last 12 years, it’s been the Victory 106” (1737cc) with enhanced intake, exhaust, tuning and cams etc. The end result being 114 RWHp and 114 RWFtTrq. Absolutely a wonderful experience in power to weight, sound and fun. I hope to have that bike till my end.

Installing a 117” (1917cc) to the Victory bumps both RW numbers to about 139 which is quite an amazing ride. But, parts alone are nearly $7k so, no, not today.

Since getting the Eldorado 1400 (84cu inch) late last year, with its similar enhancements (except cams), it seems to punch well above its weight class. I’ve never owned or been interested in a bike under 1000cc.

Someday there may be a small block in my future, but most certainly not now. I’m only 65 and still fit for riding.

Decades ago I did build my G5 into a beast with 36mm carbs, a RaceCo cam and a lightened flywheel from Moto International. Plus all the other ‘normal’ upgrades. That old Guzzi was amazing. I think I was CA Mark here on the forum at that time.

I don’t recall ever leaving any bike stock.

[Joliet Jim]

I've always preferred 500cc per cylinder for a single or twin or 250cc each for a triple.

[bad Chad]

Mark, this statement you just made makes you seem a little out of touch,
"Someday there may be a small block in my future, but most certainly not now. I’m only 65 and still fit for riding."

Your notion that a sub 1000cc bike is for the old, or riders who just can't handle a liter bike is misguided.   I'm 6'6 240Lb and 59 years of age, and I have chose to ride 853cc bikes the last few years.  I can easily handle much bigger bikes, and I'll give you, there is something to be said for big time cc's, but to conclude that sub 1000cc bikes are for those who can't handle or enjoy the big stuff is absurd.  I get the idea that you don't know what you're missing?   But I'm happy your happy, but I suggest you keep an open mind to the possibility of the excitement and enjoyment that a smaller motor can provide.

[SIR REAL ED]

Mark, this statement you just made makes you seem a little out of touch,
"Someday there may be a small block in my future, but most certainly not now. I’m only 65 and still fit for riding."

Your notion that a sub 1000cc bike is for the old, or riders who just can't handle a liter bike is misguided.   I'm 6'6 240Lb and 59 years of age, and I have chose to ride 853cc bikes the last few years.  I can easily handle much bigger bikes, and I'll give you, there is something to be said for big time cc's, but to conclude that sub 1000cc bikes are for those who can't handle or enjoy the big stuff is absurd.  I get the idea that you don't know what you're missing?   But I'm happy your happy, but I suggest you keep an open mind to the possibility of the excitement and enjoyment that a smaller motor can provide.

I re-read that post several times.  I don't think Mark asserted anything like that at all.  But I can see how one might assume that.

As always, content is determined by the receiver, not the transmitter.

One of my favorite sayings:  "People!  They're all like that!"

"Only you can prevent forest fires..... or determine the best looking bike, or determine the best engine size, or figure out what the inkblot really is!!!"

Which is what makes human communication so fun!  It will be a really boring day when everyone understands everyone else perfectly!!

We'll miss these tumultuous times where our imaginations were like wild horses if that day ever happens!!!

[TN Mark]

Mark, this statement you just made makes you seem a little out of touch,
"Someday there may be a small block in my future, but most certainly not now. I’m only 65 and still fit for riding."

Your notion that a sub 1000cc bike is for the old, or riders who just can't handle a liter bike is misguided.   I'm 6'6 240Lb and 59 years of age, and I have chose to ride 853cc bikes the last few years.  I can easily handle much bigger bikes, and I'll give you, there is something to be said for big time cc's, but to conclude that sub 1000cc bikes are for those who can't handle or enjoy the big stuff is absurd.  I get the idea that you don't know what you're missing?   But I'm happy your happy, but I suggest you keep an open mind to the possibility of the excitement and enjoyment that a smaller motor can provide.

You have your notions Chad, I have mine.

Are you saying my preference of motorcycles isn’t valid because they don’t align with yours?

Our preferences and our experiences are quite different.

I only hope you enjoy your motorcycles as much as I enjoy mine. Ride what you like and I’ll do the same.

Carry on.

[elrealistico]

750-ish CC. As it happens, the V7III and 78 Bonneville have the exact same displacement-744cc. 40 years apart. Largest bike I had was a 1200 Suzuki Bandit.