*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[JohninVT`]

Harley is not the largest motorcycle manufacturer.  It's Honda.  In the US, HD has the largest market share but they are not the largest worldwide manufacturer.

Guzzi is a brand owned by Piaggio.  It is not a viable independant company.  It's now just a brand.  Everyone bitches about Piaggio but they've left Mandello open and there is no financial argument to do so.  It is purely to appease the Guzzi faithful.  

They've stated their plan over and over but some folks just refuse to listen.  Guzzi is going to be their touring arm.  There will be some overlap with Aprilia models but there is a direction that's been articulated for the brand.  You have to have a product to sell before you open up a store to sell stuff.  A new Cali, the Norge GT, the revised Stelvio and whatever the hell the Scrambler/V7 Classic thing is represents a Cruiser/Tourer, a Sport Tourer, an Adventure Tourer and a "run about".  Seems like a solid line up for a company that currently sells 3,000 bikes a year.  Once they're all available, dealers can be brought on board.  Or existing dealers can sell with greater confidence.  

There are too many Chicken Little Luddites running around screaming the sky is falling and that they'll never buy a liquid cooled Guzzi.  A lot of those guys don't own a Guzzi made after 1985.   ::)

All I really know is that I like my Guzzi and if it had a radiator it wouldn't make me like it less. 

  

      

[Greg Field]

Harley is not the largest motorcycle manufacturer.  It's Honda.  In the US, HD has the largest market share but they are not the largest worldwide manufacturer.

Guzzi is a brand owned by Piaggio.  It is not a viable independant company.  It's now just a brand.  Everyone bitches about Piaggio but they've left Mandello open and there is no financial argument to do so.  It is purely to appease the Guzzi faithful.  

They've stated their plan over and over but some folks just refuse to listen.  Guzzi is going to be their touring arm.  There will be some overlap with Aprilia models but there is a direction that's been articulated for the brand.  You have to have a product to sell before you open up a store to sell stuff.  A new Cali, the Norge GT, the revised Stelvio and whatever the hell the Scrambler/V7 Classic thing is represents a Cruiser/Tourer, a Sport Tourer, an Adventure Tourer and a "run about".  Seems like a solid line up for a company that currently sells 3,000 bikes a year.  Once they're all available, dealers can be brought on board.  Or existing dealers can sell with greater confidence.  

There are too many Chicken Little Luddites running around screaming the sky is falling and that they'll never buy a liquid cooled Guzzi.  A lot of those guys don't own a Guzzi made after 1985.   ::)

All I really know is that I like my Guzzi and if it had a radiator it wouldn't make me like it less. 

I think appeasing Guzzi was a minor factor in keeping Mandello open.

I own an '04 Guzzi and an '09 Guzzi. I've more or less stopped caring about Guzzi because Guzzi no longer exists. Still, I would have Piaggio be rational in treating it's brand. It is not rational to water-cool the transverse-V engine. It is rational to dump the "traditional" Guzzi V for a less-disadvantageous architecture when designing a water-cooled motor. A rational observer would be forced to point out that those criticizing this observation are the real Luddites in this discussion.

[ohiorider]

BMW's best seller is now the S1000RR.

Nope.  Sales of the BMW crotch rocket are far from the top of their line.  The GS holds that title by a wide margin. The S1000 gets a lot of press play because of it's power etc but sales have not been huge at all.

"BMW S1000RR Outsells the R1200GS in the US for 2010"
http://www.asphaltandrubber.com/news/bmw-s1000rr-out-sells-r1200gs/

I believe that worldwide figures differ, but the point is made.

When I ran my cursor over the pic of the lovely lady on the S1000RR, up popped the name "Leslie Porterfield."  She can put a bike down the road (or the salt).
http://www.leslieporterfield.com/bio/leslie.php

Bob

[Greg Field]

strange double-tap.

[bad Chad]

I am with you bro!  no disrespect to those on the opposing/loosing side!

Guzzi could possibly be resurrected,  

You are kidding right?! First Guzzi isn't dead and no resurrection necessary! Second, Guzzi has put out as many and in many cases more truly new products(New engines, frames) not just derivatives than most manufacturers and certainly more than the largest M/C maker, our own HD. What is necessary is supporting Guzzi whenever possible by buying these new products and again whenever possible support those local dealers that are trying. I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.
 

[rodekyll]

Guzzi could possibly be resurrected,  

You are kidding right?! First Guzzi isn't dead and no resurrection necessary! Second, Guzzi has put out as many and in many cases more truly new products(New engines, frames) not just derivatives than most manufacturers and certainly more than the largest M/C maker, our own HD. What is necessary is supporting Guzzi whenever possible by buying these new products and again whenever possible support those local dealers that are trying. I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.
 

Just for accuracy -- Honda is the largest motorcycle mfgr, followed by Yamaha.  Both labels easily outstrip Guzzi in terms of 'truly new' products.

And my opinion:  I don't donate to for-profit organizations by choice.  That's not the way business works.  It is not necessary that I buy whatever crap Guzzi serves up for no other reason than to support them.  Me on a tupperware/fly-by-wire/where's-my-key-labeled-TUESDAY bike?  That's just stupid.  If they want my business, they necessarily need to offer me something I think is useful, and then be responsive to me as an owner.  At present they fail at both levels.

Just for accuracy HD is the largest motorcycle manufacrurer, only when you include scooters do the others become first! Where is the crap that Guzzi is serving up? A lot of crap does get dished out here but not by Guzzi! They failed you at both levels?! Get real, or at least reasonable, did you EVER buy a new Guzzi?! For 2011 all they did IS respond to customers requests with the Norge and the Stelvio improvements. I bet less than 1 percent on this board ever bought a new Guzzi, including myself but then I don't bash and bitch about Guzzi this and Guzzi that. This should be called the anti-Guzzi board. Bad Chad and others who truly appreciate and support Guzzi for other reasons than a low resale value excluded.

Guzzi could possibly be resurrected, 

You are kidding right?! First Guzzi isn't dead and no resurrection necessary! Second, Guzzi has put out as many and in many cases more truly new products(New engines, frames) not just derivatives than most manufacturers and certainly more than the largest M/C maker, our own HD. What is necessary is supporting Guzzi whenever possible by buying these new products and again whenever possible support those local dealers that are trying. I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.
 

Just for accuracy -- Honda is the largest motorcycle mfgr, followed by Yamaha.  Both labels easily outstrip Guzzi in terms of 'truly new' products.

And my opinion:  I don't donate to for-profit organizations by choice.  That's not the way business works.  It is not necessary that I buy whatever crap Guzzi serves up for no other reason than to support them.  Me on a tupperware/fly-by-wire/where's-my-key-labeled-TUESDAY bike?  That's just stupid.  If they want my business, they necessarily need to offer me something I think is useful, and then be responsive to me as an owner.  At present they fail at both levels.

Just for accuracy HD is the largest motorcycle manufacrurer, only when you include scooters do the others become first! Where is the crap that Guzzi is serving up? A lot of crap does get dished out here but not by Guzzi! They failed you at both levels?! Get real, or at least reasonable, did you EVER buy a new Guzzi?! For 2011 all they did IS respond to customers requests with the Norge and the Stelvio improvements. I bet less than 1 percent on this board ever bought a new Guzzi, including myself but then I don't bash and bitch about Guzzi this and Guzzi that. This should be called the anti-Guzzi board. Bad Chad and others who truly appreciate and support Guzzi for other reasons than a low resale value excluded.

This is a silly one to argue, since it's an objective fact.  But don't take my word for it -- do a quick google search for word's largest motorcyle manufacturer and you'll get dozens of hits that disagree with you.  Here are a few:

Answers.com - Who is the largest motorcycle manufacturer in the worldMotorcycle Safety question: Who is the largest motorcycle manufacturer in the world? Answer: Honda is the current Number One Manufacturer of motorcycles.ya ...
wiki.answers.com › ... › Motorcycles › Motorcycle Safety - Cached - Similar

Honda From Ashes to World's Largest Manufacturer of Motorcycles Sep 6, 2010 ... The founder of Honda, Soichiro Honda primary interest was in cars. Starting out as a self-taught engineer one of his first designs was a ...
ezinearticles.com › Automotive › Motorcycles - Cached

2010 Honda Gold Wing – The first-class long-distance touring ...Apr 1, 2010 ... Honda Gold Wing 2010 Front View. The Goldwing is an iconic touring bike from Honda motorcycle, the world's largest motorcycle manufacturer. ...www.autogaul.com/.../2010-honda-gold-wing-the-first-class-long-distance- touring-motorcycle/ - Cached


These are just a few that have the statement right in the search return, but feel free to read the articles to be sure.



The rest of it is my opinion, and you've not really responded to the heart of it, which is that what you propose is a charitable donation or a bailout model to keep a for-profit business in operation.  What I propose is free enterprise.  You think we need to give Guzzi money to support them, not because they have anything that I want, but because they're Moto Guzzi.  In my opinion that's unreasonable.  I run a business.  I work constantly to ensure that I am solving people's problems, at a reasonable price, and to assure them that I will be here to support my work.  I would not expect folks to just drop by the shop and hand me money to keep my doors open, and I would not expect return customers if I didn't meet their expectations the first time around.  As it is, I don't advertise, and I have more work lined up than I want to do. 

Businesses fail every day because they don't produce what the buying public wants, or because they have poor customer relations.  Guzzi suffers from both maladies, and unfortunately, they're terminal.  That's the natural order of things.  If you really feel I'm wrong about this, then how about you send me a few $thou to prove your principles?  I promise that I don't have anything here you want, and that I won't bother you with anything in return . . . .

I think that if a business -- any business -- wants my custom, they need to offer me something I need, and be responsive to me after I buy it.  It's a fact that Guzzi does not currently offer anything that interests me.  They haven't since the demise of the Convert.  It's a fact that I own a Guzzi that had recall issues and that Guzzi continues to be nonresponsive to those issues.  It follows that until we come to an agreement that satisfies me on the recall thing, and until they offer a new model Convert, they'll not be getting any new bike sales from me.  This isn't bashing and bitching.  This is just the way it is.

The bottom line is that some folks have emotional responses to economic questions, and some apply the math.  I think the responsible fiscal response is the latter.  If Guzzi's math doesn't add up, they need to either do a change-up or step aside.  I don't really much care which they do, but they can't do neither.

[Greg Field]

I am with you bro!  no disrespect to those on the opposing/loosing side!

Guzzi could possibly be resurrected,  

You are kidding right?! First Guzzi isn't dead and no resurrection necessary! Second, Guzzi has put out as many and in many cases more truly new products(New engines, frames) not just derivatives than most manufacturers and certainly more than the largest M/C maker, our own HD. What is necessary is supporting Guzzi whenever possible by buying these new products and again whenever possible support those local dealers that are trying. I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.
 

I think Paolo Timoni should reward you both with a new Griso 1200. Keep your ear sharp to make sure Nero stays in tune . . .

[kevdog3019]

 

I own an '04 Guzzi and an '09 Guzzi. I've more or less stopped caring about Guzzi because Guzzi no longer exists. Still, I would have Piaggio be rational in treating it's brand. It is not rational to water-cool the transverse-V engine. It is rational to dump the "traditional" Guzzi V for a less-disadvantageous architecture when designing a water-cooled motor. A rational observer would be forced to point out that those criticizing this observation are the real Luddites in this discussion.

I think this explains a lot Greg.  
Thank you.
-Kevin

[JohninVT`]

Harley is not the largest motorcycle manufacturer.  It's Honda.  In the US, HD has the largest market share but they are not the largest worldwide manufacturer.

Guzzi is a brand owned by Piaggio.  It is not a viable independant company.  It's now just a brand.  Everyone bitches about Piaggio but they've left Mandello open and there is no financial argument to do so.  It is purely to appease the Guzzi faithful.  

They've stated their plan over and over but some folks just refuse to listen.  Guzzi is going to be their touring arm.  There will be some overlap with Aprilia models but there is a direction that's been articulated for the brand.  You have to have a product to sell before you open up a store to sell stuff.  A new Cali, the Norge GT, the revised Stelvio and whatever the hell the Scrambler/V7 Classic thing is represents a Cruiser/Tourer, a Sport Tourer, an Adventure Tourer and a "run about".  Seems like a solid line up for a company that currently sells 3,000 bikes a year.  Once they're all available, dealers can be brought on board.  Or existing dealers can sell with greater confidence.  

There are too many Chicken Little Luddites running around screaming the sky is falling and that they'll never buy a liquid cooled Guzzi.  A lot of those guys don't own a Guzzi made after 1985.   ::)

All I really know is that I like my Guzzi and if it had a radiator it wouldn't make me like it less. 

I think appeasing Guzzi was a minor factor in keeping Mandello open.

I own an '04 Guzzi and an '09 Guzzi. I've more or less stopped caring about Guzzi because Guzzi no longer exists. Still, I would have Piaggio be rational in treating it's brand. It is not rational to water-cool the transverse-V engine. It is rational to dump the "traditional" Guzzi V for a less-disadvantageous architecture when designing a water-cooled motor. A rational observer would be forced to point out that those criticizing this observation are the real Luddites in this discussion.

Greg, you know more about motorcycles than anyone else I can think of.  You are an expert about motorcycles.  If you gave me advice about my Moto Guzzi, I would take your advice without a second thought because I am confident you would be right.  

John Bloor knows f*ck-all about motorcycles.  He is a business man.  He runs arguably the best, fastest growing motorcycle company in the world.  If he gave me advice about running a business, I would take it.  

Piaggio measures their annual revenue in billions.  I realize that you don't think much of them but SOMEONE there knows what they're doing and they are business people.  They know at least as much about motorcycles as John Bloor.  Someone there cares at least a little about Guzzi.  I know Piaggio got a giant kickback for keeping Mandello open but heritage also played a part.  Is the Triumph factory in Meriden still open?    

[Greg Field]

Greg, you know more about motorcycles than anyone else I can think of.  You are an expert about motorcycles.  If you gave me advice about my Moto Guzzi, I would take your advice without a second thought because I am confident you would be right.  

John Bloor knows f*ck-all about motorcycles.  He is a business man.  He runs arguably the best, fastest growing motorcycle company in the world.  If he gave me advice about running a business, I would take it.  

Piaggio measures their annual revenue in billions.  I realize that you don't think much of them but SOMEONE there knows what they're doing and they are business people.  They know at least as much about motorcycles as John Bloor.  Someone there cares at least a little about Guzzi.  I know Piaggio got a giant kickback for keeping Mandello open but heritage also played a part.  Is the Triumph factory in Meriden still open?    

Meriden is closed. Mandello's just a shell. It is not a factory. Bloor has done well. What he builds are Triumphs in name only. That does not diminish them as motorcycles. They are just fine as disposable Brit imitations of UJMs. They, at least, are rationally designed and show some original thought. I salute "Triumph."

Unfortunately, what Guzzi has become, even if a few folks are retained to do "assembly" in Mandello, is a sham that does final assembly on irrational motorcycles. There is no design in Mandello. The soul is gone. That is simple fact.

Piaggio loses buttloads of money, in the conventional sense, on Guzzi and Aprilia. Only the government subsidies make either remotely rational, and subsidies de facto remove all rationality.

If you choose to be all "ra-ra" about that, it's your choice. I am almost to the point that I cannot summon up the least care about this silly drama any longer. Guzzi is dead.

YMMV and all that.

[Rainman]

I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.

I've noticed the same thing.

[Arizona Wayne]

I visit other manufacturers forums and have not seen the kind of negativity toward their brand this board shows on a regular basis.

I've noticed the same thing.
[/quote






That's because other forums are daily monitored for negativity.  Here MG negativity is allowed.  A LOT of participants here are new to Guzzis or don't have the commitment to the brand some others do.

I really don't understand what Luap is shooting for here.  It appears to be volume/quantity, nothing else.   :-\  

I don't say this against Greg Field.  He is a valued participant on Moto Guzzis, much more than most others, but at the same time he isn't totally enamored solely to Guzzis.   I respect that.  :)

[radan2]

I did not buy my Breva because it was air cooled.

I did not buy my Breva because it had a transverse 90-degree twin cylinder layout.

I did not buy my Breva because of the history of Moto Guzzi.

I did not buy my Breva because of the plant at Mandello.

I did not buy my Breva because it was fast.

I did not buy my Breva because of its sound--I never heard the engine until after I bought it.

I did not buy my Breva because it was technologically sophisticated.

I did not buy my Breva because it was easy to repair.

I did not buy my Breva because it handled so well in the twisties.

I did not buy my Breva because of the extensive dealer network.

I did not buy my Breva because parts were so easy to find.

I did not buy my Breva because of its reputation on the street.

I did not buy my Breva because it was priced competitively with the other 750's available.

I bought it because I thought it was the most stunningly beautiful bike I had ever seen.

I walked into the showroom, intending to look for a new helmet, and there, in a line with a bunch of BMWs and Royal Enfields, was this incredibly gorgeous bike. I fought the urge to buy it at once. I went home and looked it up on the Internet. I found out that Guzzis can last for hundreds of thousands of miles--so if I bought it, and took care of it, it would last me the rest of my life. And the next day I bought it.

I still think it is the most beautiful bike I have ever seen, with the possible exception of the Norge.  I would like to have a Norge, if I could keep the Breva as well. I would sell the Bumblebee, but not the Breva. And to tell the truth, even to get a Norge, I would not give up the Breva.

Piaggio, build beautiful bikes and put Moto Guzzi labels on them.

It isn't the technology. Or the speed. Or the historic factory. It is the unique beauty of the bikes.

The MV Agusta that costs $120,000 looks to me at first glance like a Honda.  My Breva doesn't look like a Honda, or a Harley, or an MV Agusta, or anything but what it is: a uniquely beautiful motorcycle.

I don't care what engine you put in it, or what cooling system it uses, or how much plastic bodywork it has, or anything else. If you build beautiful bikes, people will buy them--not quirky bikes, or retro bikes, or up-to-the-minute stylish bikes that look outdated in 5 years, but beautiful bikes.

Build beautiful bikes.

[moltoguzzi]

Greg, you know more about motorcycles than anyone else I can think of.  You are an expert about motorcycles.  If you gave me advice about my Moto Guzzi, I would take your advice without a second thought because I am confident you would be right.  

John Bloor knows f*ck-all about motorcycles.  He is a business man.  He runs arguably the best, fastest growing motorcycle company in the world.  If he gave me advice about running a business, I would take it.  

Piaggio measures their annual revenue in billions.  I realize that you don't think much of them but SOMEONE there knows what they're doing and they are business people.  They know at least as much about motorcycles as John Bloor.  Someone there cares at least a little about Guzzi.  I know Piaggio got a giant kickback for keeping Mandello open but heritage also played a part.  Is the Triumph factory in Meriden still open?    

Meriden is closed. Mandello's just a shell. It is not a factory. Bloor has done well. What he builds are Triumphs in name only. That does not diminish them as motorcycles. They are just fine as disposable Brit imitations of UJMs. They, at least, are rationally designed and show some original thought. I salute "Triumph."

Unfortunately, what Guzzi has become, even if a few folks are retained to do "assembly" in Mandello, is a sham that does final assembly on irrational motorcycles. There is no design in Mandello. The soul is gone. That is simple fact.

Piaggio loses buttloads of money, in the conventional sense, on Guzzi and Aprilia. Only the government subsidies make either remotely rational, and subsidies de facto remove all rationality.

If you choose to be all "ra-ra" about that, it's your choice. I am almost to the point that I cannot summon up the least care about this silly drama any longer. Guzzi is dead.

YMMV and all that.

I'm sorry to hear this from you cause its irrational thinking. A brand is not attached to a building, a name or even a location, but rather the ideal of their mission. While Ducati and Aprilia are writing their history as we speak on the race tracks of the world and have well established missions that their customers can relate to, so does Guzzi have a mission that a few, according to sales numbers appreciate. Their mission as I understand it, is to build well balanced motorcycles that will do everything well and have esthetically a balance between function and form with the simplicity of traditional technology such as air/oil cooled engines, shaft drive and easy to work on. Now imagine for a moment that HD sold the Norge and the Griso, what would the sales figures be like, I wonder about things like that because HD and Guzzi share so many ideals. I also wonder sometimes "what if" the Italians as whole cared about logistics and efficiency as much as they do about designing and winning, where would Guzzi be. Not dead by a long shot, even after the Guzzi name will no longer be around someone will pick up their mission, cause its a good one. But I am sorry to hear your lost interest in Guzzi's.  

[Kev m]

I'm not emotionally invested in Triumph,  but what a load of crap ... Triumph in name only? A sham? Whatever..

As for irrationality,  wake up cause at least in the US motorcycles ARE irrationality, beautiful,  wonderful irrationality.

I truly love my Guzzis and hope I have the option to buy more new ones, but if they stop making what I want, I'll move on.

The personification of a company or motorcycle is nice from a feel good standpoint,  but when doing so it's about how that one individual feels about the current product.

Obviously some here don't care for it, others love it.

Put me in the love it and bought 2 in the past decade and willing to buy more new category.

But I prefer air cooled, easy maintenance,  well balanced (in various senses of the word) and generally unique machines.

If I can't get all those things, then I'll look elsewhere and maybe give up the last category for a convenient dealer network.

[JohninVT`]

Greg, you know more about motorcycles than anyone else I can think of.  You are an expert about motorcycles.  If you gave me advice about my Moto Guzzi, I would take your advice without a second thought because I am confident you would be right.  

John Bloor knows f*ck-all about motorcycles.  He is a business man.  He runs arguably the best, fastest growing motorcycle company in the world.  If he gave me advice about running a business, I would take it.  

Piaggio measures their annual revenue in billions.  I realize that you don't think much of them but SOMEONE there knows what they're doing and they are business people.  They know at least as much about motorcycles as John Bloor.  Someone there cares at least a little about Guzzi.  I know Piaggio got a giant kickback for keeping Mandello open but heritage also played a part.  Is the Triumph factory in Meriden still open?    

Meriden is closed. Mandello's just a shell. It is not a factory. Bloor has done well. What he builds are Triumphs in name only. That does not diminish them as motorcycles. They are just fine as disposable Brit imitations of UJMs. They, at least, are rationally designed and show some original thought. I salute "Triumph."

Unfortunately, what Guzzi has become, even if a few folks are retained to do "assembly" in Mandello, is a sham that does final assembly on irrational motorcycles. There is no design in Mandello. The soul is gone. That is simple fact.

Piaggio loses buttloads of money, in the conventional sense, on Guzzi and Aprilia. Only the government subsidies make either remotely rational, and subsidies de facto remove all rationality.

If you choose to be all "ra-ra" about that, it's your choice. I am almost to the point that I cannot summon up the least care about this silly drama any longer. Guzzi is dead.

YMMV and all that.

Are you drinking and posting?  Since when does the word "rational" and Italian motorcycle belong in the same sentence?  I'm not a Piaggio apologist but if they make it possible for me to indulge my love of weird Italian bikes I am thankful for it.  I am not all "ra-ra" but I don't have a personal agenda either.  I can stand back unemotionally and see that they are improving the product.  They are listening to customer feedback and revising current models.  They have a plan.  Whether the plan is ultimately successful remains to be seen but it's better than no plan at all. 

The "old" Guzzi IS dead.  They made brand new, antique motorcycles and arrogantly assumed the world would buy an inferior product.  The old Guzzi deserved to die.  All the chest thumping about Mandello and Tonti and near religious fervor exhibited by some folks is just....ridiculous.  That a failed business model and an inferior product inspire such fervor is what is truly "irrational". 

Guzzi has been irrelevant since 1975.               

[steven c]

Irrelevant since 1975? Maybe 79. But 75, I don't think so. ;D

[dgurovich]

"A lot of those guys don't own a Guzzi made after 1985."

1979, '74, whatever.  30+ years ago.  Besides that Marusho did travers V-Twin 3-4 years before Guzzi.

You want to see acompany that really is identified by it's motor?  Try Parilla (hi-cam) -- They now make go-kart engines.

I love my 1960 Parilla for what it is.  A small, quick, light bike.  Would I like to see a new one?  I just don't care.

For all the people on this board that love the air-cooled V-Twin that Guzzi makes now and has made over the last 40+ years, there are plenty of bikes available for you.  It's obvious by the particular side representing the "don't change anything or I'll hate you even more" faction, there are plenty of bikes out there for you to buy, build, customize and service under your particular shade tree.

You actually don't really care if Guzzi comes out with a new motor or not, because you don't want a new motorcycle of any brand anyway.  Would you seriously purchase a brand-spanking new V7 Sport or 1000S for $16+K?  No, you'd complain that it now has fuel injection, catalysts, electronics and not enough power.  But you'd sure as hell get the old one for less money, and Guzzi couldn't make what you want for the $8K that you think you should pay.  You just don't care about new Guzzis -- ask yourself if you're just not really pissed off that everything that you like and know about motorcycles is just changing so rapidly that the old stuff is more fun?

I think that -- that's why I ride the Parilla and think it's just about the most fun I can have on two wheels.

Still, I support Guzzi because I want to.  My V7 Classic is a great bike!  It is about as maintenance and worry free as anything I've ever owned on two or four wheels.

[Greg Field]

I'm not emotionally invested in Triumph,  but what a load of crap ... Triumph in name only? A sham? Whatever..

Neither the company nor the motorcycles of today has any direct connection to those of the past. The new Triumphs are in that way like all the many newer machines dubbed "Indians." It's just the truth. I never said Triumph was a sham.

[Greg Field]

Are you drinking and posting?  Since when does the word "rational" and Italian motorcycle belong in the same sentence?  I'm not a Piaggio apologist but if they make it possible for me to indulge my love of weird Italian bikes I am thankful for it.  I am not all "ra-ra" but I don't have a personal agenda either.  I can stand back unemotionally and see that they are improving the product.  They are listening to customer feedback and revising current models.  They have a plan.  Whether the plan is ultimately successful remains to be seen but it's better than no plan at all. 

The "old" Guzzi IS dead.  They made brand new, antique motorcycles and arrogantly assumed the world would buy an inferior product.  The old Guzzi deserved to die.  All the chest thumping about Mandello and Tonti and near religious fervor exhibited by some folks is just....ridiculous.  That a failed business model and an inferior product inspire such fervor is what is truly "irrational". 

Guzzi has been irrelevant since 1975.               

The latest Ducatis are all rationally designed motorcycles. It's why they are successful. And even though the yare rationally designed, they're still Italian. How can that be? Guzzis were once rationally designed. Guzzi was once successful. I wonder if there might be a link there?

The old Guzzi deserved new owners who would carry on the spirit of the company. Piaggio isn't that. Under Piaggio, Guzzi loses money, and yet you all consider that a successful business model?

I find it really odd that anyone would want a motorcycle board that consists solely of empty-headed cheerleading. If that's what you all want, fine. I'll join Roper in avoiding this place, so y'all can cheer all the louder.

[Kev m]

I'm not emotionally invested in Triumph,  but what a load of crap ... Triumph in name only? A sham? Whatever..

Neither the company nor the motorcycles of today has any direct connection to those of the past. The new Triumphs are in that way like all the many newer machines dubbed "Indians." It's just the truth. I never said Triumph was a sham.

Triumph has the MOST important possible connection to the original company (other than the legal right to use the name). Triumph is building bikes in both the spirit and form of the original, while also striking out in new directions. Works for me.

My mentioning the term sham was that seemed to be making a similar argument against Guzzi regarding assembly at Mandello calling it a sham.

Sorry man, I got a lot of love for your knowledge and passion but I think you couldn't be more off-base on this topic, specifcally on why any of us should give a shit.

Soul, jezus you guys are sounding more and more like Harley riders.

Now that said, I DO think there is a somewhat intangible quality to a Guzzi that I also find in a Harley, but it's a sum of the parts, the form and the function, the way it just plain accomplishes the things I want it to in a simple, beautiful and balanced way. And I see a certain amount of commonality in these qualities across the brand's products.

So if "Soul" is the perception of some sort of brand identity which is seen/felt through the products, well, then OK, Guzzi has one, and frankly if so, I think it's tied to the current motor configuration, though I do accept that it COULD (like BMW) be built around a second configuration in the future. I just don't think one could change it 180 degrees on a dime and expect there not to be backlash and a possible complete loss of the current identity.

I don't see the same thing in most Japanese brands, possibly because the build too many flavors, they are too much like McDonald's trying to be everything to everyone, instead of just doing a few versions of one thing really well.

[Greg Field]

I'm not emotionally invested in Triumph,  but what a load of crap ... Triumph in name only? A sham? Whatever..

Neither the company nor the motorcycles of today has any direct connection to those of the past. The new Triumphs are in that way like all the many newer machines dubbed "Indians." It's just the truth. I never said Triumph was a sham.

Triumph has the MOST important possible connection to the original company (other than the legal right to use the name). Triumph is building bikes in both the spirit and form of the original, while also striking out in new directions. Works for me.

My mentioning the term sham was that seemed to be making a similar argument against Guzzi regarding assembly at Mandello calling it a sham.

Sorry man, I got a lot of love for your knowledge and passion but I think you couldn't be more off-base on this topic, specifcally on why any of us should give a shit.

Soul, jezus you guys are sounding more and more like Harley riders.

Now that said, I DO think there is a somewhat intangible quality to a Guzzi that I also find in a Harley, but it's a sum of the parts, the form and the function, the way it just plain accomplishes the things I want it to in a simple, beautiful and balanced way. And I see a certain amount of commonality in these qualities across the brand's products.

So if "Soul" is the perception of some sort of brand identity which is seen/felt through the products, well, then OK, Guzzi has one, and frankly if so, I think it's tied to the current motor configuration, though I do accept that it COULD (like BMW) be built around a second configuration in the future. I just don't think one could change it 180 degrees on a dime and expect there not to be backlash and a possible complete loss of the current identity.

I don't see the same thing in most Japanese brands, possibly because the build too many flavors, they are too much like McDonald's trying to be everything to everyone, instead of just doing a few versions of one thing really well.

There're way more similarities than differences between Guzzis and Harleys. Both do have soul. Some see it. Some kinda sense it but are sheepish about acknowledging it. Some never will see it. So be it.

Except among us weirdos here, and to very few outsiders, Guzzi has no positive identity.

Guzzi has plenty of negative identity, though, and I saw it every day working in a shop that sold Guzzis. Guzzis're quirky antiques for old duffers. That's what they say about even the Sport 1200 and 1200 Griso.

If Piaggio wants to see Guzzi continue to slouch off into obscurity, they'll stick with the transverse-V motor when they water-cool it. If they want success, they'll look to more suitable engine architectures.

If Guzzi is not a building or a place, then Guzzi is also not a transverse-V engine. It is said that the old factory holds Guzzi back, and that there's nothing about Mandello that imbues itself into the motorcycles to make them special. I say both of those are false, but clearly I am in the minority on that. But if you really believe those things, how can you believe that the transverse-V engine doesn't also hold Guzzi back? If you polled average riders, you would find that you are in the minority about the transverse-V engine. Most riders think that it's a retarded design in the water-cooled age. They are right in that assessment and will vote with their dollars.

[bad Chad]

"I find it really odd that anyone would want a motorcycle board that consists solely of empty-headed cheerleading. If that's what you all want, fine. I'll join Roper in avoiding this place, so y'all can cheer all the louder."  Greg F


I knew it was just a matter of time before the heat got to hot in the kitchen!

[rodekyll]

Don't worry, Greg.  I think most of us recognized that this discussion went through the looking glass back when the irrational arguments offered facts and figures and the rational one was based in 'ideals', 'imagines', and 'what-if's'.  The planes of reality are too disparate for reasoning.

[Kev m]

There're way more similarities than differences between Guzzis and Harleys. Both do have soul. Some see it. Some kinda sense it but are sheepish about acknowledging it. Some never will see it. So be it.

Actually, I've always preached the similarities.

And IF they are more similar than dis-similar, than Guzzis lack of success (at least in the US) has NOTHING to do with your perceived limitations of the motor configuration, it has EVERYTHING to do with Brand Image/Marketing and Dealership Network (actual reliability of new models being part of both categories).

Except among us weirdos here, and to very few outsiders, Guzzi has no positive identity.

I think that is absolutely not true.

Hell even half the guys at the Harley shops know what a Guzzi is FROM THAT ENGINE DESIGN.

Pretty much any rider who reads one or more motorcycle magazine knows VISUALLY what a Guzzi is from that engine design.

If Guzzi is not a building or a place, then Guzzi is also not a transverse-V engine. It is said that the old factory holds Guzzi back, and that there's nothing about Mandello that imbues itself into the motorcycles to make them special. I say both of those are false, but clearly I am in the minority on that. But if you really believe those things, how can you believe that the transverse-V engine doesn't also hold Guzzi back? If you polled average riders, you would find that you are in the minority about the transverse-V engine. Most riders think that it's a retarded design in the water-cooled age. They are right in that assessment and will vote with their dollars.

Logically you've not supported your position on the motor and brand identity.

Probably 90-99% of the people who buy a Guzzi (or most motorcycles) never see the factory or particularly care about it.

But 100% of them and their riding buddies SEE the bike, and on Guzzis for decades the SINGLE MOST DEFINING CHARACTERISTIC is their unique to the market engine layout. That IS the brand identity.

We, as owners, know there is more to it, the eclectic abilities and balance of the bikes, but that VAST majority of the riding public do not have any idea about those things. They just know it's the bike with the cylinders sticking up on each side.

My experience (from the past 2 decades as both a rider AND in technical publishing for the motor vehicle industries) is that THE VAST MAJORITY OF CONSUMERS (MOTORYCLISTS INCLUDED) DO NOT KNOW JACK DICK ABOUT THE ENGINEERING OF THEIR BIKES. And as proud as we are to be "self-sufficient Guzzisitas" just read half the technical questions on this forum or any other forum to know that's true.

Most do not know what limitation a longitudinal crankshaft/transverse V-cylinder architecture place on a motorcycle, so they don't know or care if it is logical to water cool such a layout.

They only care about finding a bike that DOES WHAT THEY WANT and LOOKS LIKE THEY WANT.

After those things they look at

1. Price
2. Convenience (ease of finding dealers and accessories)
3. Moto journalist reports
4. Race results.
5. Specific engineering requirements

There may be a minority who put things like 4 or 5 first, but they are a very small minority.

Actually I put 5 FIRST, but I'm weird like that because I have VERY VERY VERY specific requirements for a vehicle (bike or car or truck or boat). I've never bought a new car that wasn't either special ordered from the factory OR customized significantly (as in to the tune of an additional 10-20% or more of the vehicle price) before delivery. But I KNOW I'm in the minority.

I suggest that you happen to be in the minority too.

Therefore you and I can't impose our own preferences on Guzzi, we have to put ourselves in the shoes of the average consumer.

Talk about voting with their dollars, Harley remains the absolute king of street bike sales in the US and the vast majority of those sales are their air-cooled models.

Again, I'll repeat, I'm not against Guzzi branching out into a water-cooled bike, even possibly one of a different engine design (i.e. not longitudinal crank/transverse V), but ONLY if they don't at the same time abandon their air-cooled version. If they changed all of their bikes to water-cooling AND abandonded that too, they would have a VERY VERY long road to a new brand identity. They would be no more than another Aprilia or Augusta, with sales EVEN LOWER than they are now.

[ridingron]

WOW!! I read the first few post and walked away. I came back and decided to wade through it.  Look at the emotions in this thread! I'm about average age for this group but rather young in the motorcycle years (!4). I've owned a single, 2 V-twins,  a couple V-4's and 2 older UJM I-4. I like touring and have yet to find a bike better for than the ST1100 ABS. It is a V-4 shaft drive like a Guzzi. I have highway pegs and can comfortably stretch my legs out. So far, I'm pretty happy with my California, but I had to spend another $450 (Outsider) to make changing the oil a reasonable task. This is the silliness that most buyers won't put up with.  Water cooled and fuel injection is inevitable. I think Guzzi could keep selling "old looking" bikes while developing and selling updated design bikes. The Luddites can buy the old bikes and new customers can buy the new Guzzi.

None of it matters if a dealer system isn't developed.

Make Modella a museum.  ;D  ;D  ;D

[Dean Rose]

They wouldn't be shooting themselves in the foot, it would be straight through the HEART if they do away with the air-cooled V-twin like we have. Going to the oil cooler for all of the newer engines they have now was OK. Sure have Piaggio/Aprilia/Guzzi design a new engine but keep the V-twin too.


Dean

[JohninVT`]

I'm going to state this once again so you don't misunderstand, I..am...not...a..Pi aggio...apologist.  

Greg,
Guzzi lost money before Piaggio.  Guzzi has lost money for 30 years.  If you want to blame Piaggio for that, so be it but don't twist what I'm saying and threaten to take your ball and go home when I point out that you're unrelentingly negative.  Especially when you then respond to me pointing that out by being....unrelentin gly negative.    

As a motorcycle historian and Guzzi specialist, you're background is impeccable.  As a business person, that may not be the case.  You're talking a lot of horseshit about Ducati's being rational and how Piaggio don't know what they're doing.  Motorcycles and business are two seperate things and business needs to come first unless you have a nutjob billionaire like Deitrich Mateshizch at the helm.      

Since when is the service plan for any new Ducati rational?  What are you smoking?  What part of mashing your nuts agains the tank on every single new Ducati because of the sloped seats is rational?  Set the Jim Beam down.  The Diavel is rational?  Please.

I whole-heartedly agree with you on this being an opportunity to introduce new engine architecture though.  The last big recession spawned the UJM.  Maybe this would be a good time to design a clean sheet liquid cooled single with shaft drive that could be used as a platform for a streetbike, Scrambler or NTX.  It might sell in Asia and Europe.      



  

[Greg Field]

"I find it really odd that anyone would want a motorcycle board that consists solely of empty-headed cheerleading. If that's what you all want, fine. I'll join Roper in avoiding this place, so y'all can cheer all the louder."  Greg F


I knew it was just a matter of time before the heat got to hot in the kitchen!

Heat? Thanks for the belly laugh.

[Big Block Jon]

I agree with Greg in that I personally would much prefer to see a ground-up design for a water-cooled engine, particularly if it could be unique in some tangible way. But I care about things like the integrity of the concept, and elegance of the solution.

Greg and I part ways when he says that most buyers would be strongly influenced by that same kind of preoccupation, particularly when we talk about a theoretical expanded customer base.

Because I don't believe that the majority of motorcyclists know much one way or the other about the elegance of engineering (which in all honesty is largely subjective anyway. Telescopic forks, anyone?). They just want something that looks cool, feels good and they want to see in some magazine or hear from friends that theirs is excellent in some way.  Cycle world says it has ten more ponies than the Honda. Or everybody knows that their bike is "real" while others are "fake".