*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[FASTFREDDY]

I'll pose the question I always ask when we discuss whatever new liquid-cooled engine has been mentioned in the media: what engine configuration should "Guzzi" adopt that will be as identifiable as their own rather than just another "me too" effort? Just about every configuration has been-there-done-that to death by some other manufacturer. Triple - Triumph. Flat-four - Honda. Flat-six - Honda. Inline-six - BMW now. V-four - Honda. Inline-four - everybody (really worked well the first time Guzzi/Benelli tried!). Flat-twin - BMW. V-Twin (transverse crank) - everybody. Parallel-twin - Triumph, Norton. What's that leave? V6, V8, maybe a wide angle V-twin (120 like the Bicilindrica), radial? 

Perhaps a longitudinally mounted V4. Honda has done it with their ST1100 & ST1300 but they are not known for it.  Guzzi could make it their own and then be known for longitudinally mounted V2's and V4's.

They should build a V7 based LC V4 sport tourer and muscle-cruiser. 1500cc V4? Hell yeah, I'd buy one. Just may put Guzzi on the map for more folks, especially if the magazines would review it favorably.
BTW, I wonder why Guzzi is left out of most comparison tests? Sure, they may come in last, but any press is good press.

Fred

[kevdog3019]

Greg... if you want to hang onto the old building in Mandello for assembly, etc. and hold it up as the true "soul" of Guzzi, then why is this engine so important to do away with?  You want tradition yet don't want tradition.  The plant is crumbling and the engine has been revised over the past few years.  Seems you're holding out for the wrong things.  
-Kevin

[Greg Field]

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.      

Of course Guzzi lost money before Piaggio. You all are telling me how much has changed under Piaggio. I'm suggesting that far less has changed than you think. The Guzzis of 2011 are less up to 2011 standards than a 1998 EV was in 1998. They are losing money on them. Dealers are losing money on them. What has changed? They are slouching down a tragic path. I would steer them onto a new one. That makes me negative? Rest assured that I am enjoying the irony.

Ducati builds bikes people buy. Ducati's bikes look great, go like hell, and sell to eager buyers without need to price them at a loss. The engine architecture perfectly suits the bikes. It is better water-cooled, because the architecture is less than ideal for air-cooling. Sure, it takes more maintenance than a Guzzi engine, but if these customers willingly buy them even though the service schedule is onerous, that testifies even more strongly to how rational was the manufacturer who made them. More money for the dealers and manufacturer.

Here's a recent example of how this all plays out. My riding group includes a guy named Anthony. I met him through Steak (from this list), and Anthony started riding with us on a New Year's Day ride in 2008 to Neah Bay, a fairly challenging ride. At the time, he had a huge Harley bagger. He tried hard but couldn't really keep up. He kept coming on rides with the Guzzi boys, though, hoping to improve and was getting better with each ride. He learned over many rides what Guzzis were and admired them. This summer, he even joined us at the Guzzi National. On the ride back, he kept up well, but to do so, he frightened himself badly pushing that Harley way past its limits.

So, he decided to get a more capable bike. Despite all the good feelings he had toward Guzzis, the great dealer at his service here, the super-cheap prices on leftover bikes at Moto Intl., and a very active and helpful local Guzzi support system that he was already well-familiar with, he bought the fanciest Ohlins-epuipped 4vpc Ducati Multistrada, rather than a Guzzi. He had every excuse to buy a Guzzi but bought a Ducati anyway—a more-expensive bike that takes more service and has poorer dealer support here. That was pretty telling. You may call Anthony irrational, but I can't. First of all, he'd beat my ass, but more importantly, he loves the bike. He rode it with the Guzzi boys to Neah Bay this NYD.

If a guy like that passed on buying a Guzzi, it highights how steeply uphill Guzzi's path is with the current bikes.

[kevdog3019]

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.

Spot on Kevin!  If people have heard of Guzzi (that's the minority!), most have never ridden one.  That being said, was it the motor that they never test-rode that turned them off?  Lets maybe consider other factors that turned them off.  I had a friend test ride a Guzzi for the first time recently.  He loved how it rode, but was not willing to buy because of all the other issues related to owning a Guzzi.  It was the motor he wanted, but not the other crap.  Fix the other crap first.  I wouldn't own a Guzzi if it wasn't for this motor.  I'm not married to it but I've hated sitting on the sidelines looking at all the other crap that should be fixed with Guzzi.  No other engine excites me.  I'm 44 yrs old.  
-Kevin

[Kev m]

Greg, the problem with that anecdote is that I've ridden a number of Ducatis and have absolutely no desire to buy one.

So it works both ways and there is more to the story. I.E. people buy bikes for different reasons. Maybe he just wanted to try something MORE different from his Harley than the Guzzi? But what's right for him won't necessarily be so for someone else.

Anecdotal retort - Avacatto from this board owned an M696, and then a Multistrada (which I rode recently, not my thing, wouldn't buy one for sure) and sold them, now he's got an 8V Griso.

But, as a related tangent, I'm curious what the air-cooled vs. water-cooled motor split has been for Ducati over the past decade or so? I know the Monster was predominantly air-cooled and was a sales leader for a long time, especially the time-frame where Ducati finally broke the 10k mark in the US. I suspect it will show that Ducati was smart enough not to just water-cool everything and alienate their current customers.

[kevdog3019]

Ducati is known to most folks.  Guzzi is not.  No mystery to me why their numbers are higher than Guzzi's.  What people know they buy.  I think we need to get off this whole motor debate until we unveil Guzzi to the public.
-Kevin 

[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.      

Of course Guzzi lost money before Piaggio. You all are telling me how much has changed under Piaggio. I'm suggesting that far less has changed than you think. The Guzzis of 2011 are less up to 2011 standards than a 1998 EV was in 1998. They are losing money on them. Dealers are losing money on them. What has changed? They are slouching down a tragic path. I would steer them onto a new one. That makes me negative? Rest assured that I am enjoying the irony.

Ducati builds bikes people buy. Ducati's bikes look great, go like hell, and sell to eager buyers without need to price them at a loss. The engine architecture perfectly suits the bikes. It is better water-cooled, because the architecture is less than ideal for air-cooling. Sure, it takes more maintenance than a Guzzi engine, but if these customers willingly buy them even though the service schedule is onerous, that testifies even more strongly to how rational was the manufacturer who made them. More money for the dealers and manufacturer.

Here's a recent example of how this all plays out. My riding group includes a guy named Anthony. I met him through Steak (from this list), and Anthony started riding with us on a New Year's Day ride in 2008 to Neah Bay, a fairly challenging ride. At the time, he had a huge Harley bagger. He tried hard but couldn't really keep up. He kept coming on rides with the Guzzi boys, though, hoping to improve and was getting better with each ride. He learned over many rides what Guzzis were and admired them. This summer, he even joined us at the Guzzi National. On the ride back, he kept up well, but to do so, he frightened himself badly pushing that Harley way past its limits.

So, he decided to get a more capable bike. Despite all the good feelings he had toward Guzzis, the great dealer at his service here, the super-cheap prices on leftover bikes at Moto Intl., and a very active and helpful local Guzzi support system that he was already well-familiar with, he bought the fanciest Ohlins-epuipped 4vpc Ducati Multistrada, rather than a Guzzi. He had every excuse to buy a Guzzi but bought a Ducati anyway—a more-expensive bike that takes more service and has poorer dealer support here. That was pretty telling. You may call Anthony irrational, but I can't. First of all, he'd beat my ass, but more importantly, he loves the bike. He rode it with the Guzzi boys to Neah Bay this NYD.

If a guy like that passed on buying a Guzzi, it highights how steeply uphill Guzzi's path is with the current bikes.

I not telling you anything.  You know more about bikes than I do.  I am just suggesting that a 2012 Stelvio is going to be a legitimate adventure tourer when placed up against the current competition.  I think the 2012 Norge GT is going to be a helluva lot closer to besting a BMW RT in any sort of comparison than the 2007-2011 is.  

I'm 41 and have owned 30 bikes of all engine layouts and style.  A few years ago I traded a ZRX1100 straight up for a 2002 Lemans.  I liked it but it wasn't what I really wanted.  I sold it because I never connected with it.  A year later my wife bought me an Eldorado for my birthday and it was love at first ride.  I loved riding it but it didn't meet my needs and as an enthusiastic rider, I didn't want to get killed by riding it beyond its' capabilities.  It was an antique.  It was not fast enough, did not stop well enough and did not handle well enough.  It was a wonderful, amazingly fun bike to cruise on but I am not a cruiser kind of guy yet.  

For my 40th birthday I decided to buy a brand new motorcycle.  I looked at every kind of bike.  The new Concours, Aprilia RSV's, Ducati's, Honda's, I even very briefly considered becoming a BMW GS riding D-Bag but in the end I couldn't see myself wearing the high viz twat suit.  I finally narrowed it down to two bikes that I thought were closest to meeting the needs I had listed for the next five years.  The two bikes were the ZX-14 and the 1200 Sport.  On the surface, these bikes have nothing in common.  They are worlds apart in their performance.  The Kawasaki dealer is 18 miles away.  The Guzzi dealer is 105 miles away.  

I bought the Guzzi because it's "different".  It came down to me deciding that I would rather sit on my living room couch all winter looking at a Moto Guzzi than the Kawasaki.  That's it.  It meets my needs and it's "different".  I am not ignorant of Guzzi's history.  When someone like Pescara starts patronizing me and throwing names around, I know who they are.  I just don't care.  History is secondary to garage appeal for me.  I like my Guzzi, I don't care if anyone else does and I'm glad that Piaggio is improving the bikes.  That's all.  The bike is the most important thing to me...not the history behind it.  The history is a bonus, not a deciding factor in my purchase.        

[Greg Field]

Actually, I've always preached the similarities.

I am aware of that and have always enjoyed your views on the matter. You are one of the few who sees it. I know some Harley guys who see it, too. Piaggio could capitalize on that if they made a few key changes. Dave and I gave them an earful of things to consider on their forthcoming Road King "killer."

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).

Guzzis and Harleys share many similarities, but ergonomics are not one of the similarities. If the bikes don't fit or feel odd to most people, all the marketing in the world won't make 'em buy. More on this below.

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.

Some may know it, but that's not to say it's a positive perception. I know what a Suzuki Madura is. It's not a positive perception, though.

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.

They know it, but it's not a positive association.

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.

I've worked in the same industry and am a rider, too. You're right: they don't care about transverse this and longitudinal that. I never said that they did.

What I've said is that potential customers care when the tech stuff is in the way of their knees, or when foot controls have to be put in awkward places to keep their knees off of the tech stuff, or when seat heights are too high compared to the competition because of the aforementioned, or because the wheelbase is too long because of the aforementioned, or because the weight bias is so rearward because of the aforementioned. That's when they very much care and vote with their wallet. I saw it almost everyday, sometimes several times a day. If a bike fits a person poorly, it's game over on the showroom 75 percent of the time. The transverse-V engine forces all kinds of compromises from an engineering standpoint that are only justified if the excellent air flow that configuration provides is needed to cool the engine.

Yes, I am in the minority. That does not prevent me from acknowledging the majority point of view, however

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

I really believe that that's what I'm doing here (shoes of average consumer). Of course, I can't impose anything on Piaggio. I would just like them to think outside the "Guzzis ARE transverse-V twins" box that will nullify the effect of future improvements.

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.

You're preaching to the choir there. There are good damned reasons H-D sells so many bikes.

And long live the air-cooled motorcycle engine: "The Motor that has had no Future Since 1977."

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.

OK, I can mostly agree with that. I hope they build the air-cooled motor for another 90 years. I hope they'll also start working on some other motor configuration for any water-cooled Guzzis.

[Greg Field]

Greg... if you want to hang onto the old building in Mandello for assembly, etc. and hold it up as the true "soul" of Guzzi, then why is this engine so important to do away with?  You want tradition yet don't want tradition.  The plant is crumbling and the engine has been revised over the past few years.  Seems you're holding out for the wrong things.  
-Kevin

I would turn that on its head:

You all say the tradition of factory and place do not matter but that the tradition of a transverse-V engine matters? Why? Nobody buys them. Nobody but a few thousand nutcases around the world is even peripherally aware of the Guzzi V. If Guzzi sticks with that engine and water-cools it, they are doomed to needing all the money Piaggio is willing to lose.

[Kev m]

Greg, my point on ergos was more of corporate similarities. I.E. you know what to expect from Harley, from model-to-model there are huge similarities in fit, feel, finish, controls etc. I would say same goes for Guzzi, that model brand consistency. That such things are part of brand identity.

On awareness, I vehemently disagree that most riders have an unfavorable "awareness" of the brand. In my experiene 9 out of 10 guys get excited when they see a Guzzi. Whether they really "know" the brand or not, MOST people seem to react very positively to the thought/image of a Guzzi.

IF there is a problem with the brand being tarnished, I don't think that comes out until they start doing research and start talking a high percentage of bitchy/crabby owners.

But back to ergos, you bring up a point I find curious, because I seem to be built to fit the average man's bike.

At 5' 10-11" ish, 32" inseam, 225 lbs or so, I seem to be a size where I just kinda fit most bikes.

Cylinders on Guzzis are not in my way, my Breva is fine with the stock seat or the 1" lowered seat, I could ride oilheads with their adjustable seats (on models so equipped) in any of the up to 3 positions, Sportsters fit me, even the lowered models fit well enough etc etc etc.

I'll have to take your word for it if you tell me some people don't fit Guzzi's all that well, but considering some of the lumbering giants that ride Californias, I kinda took it for granted that a Norge or Breva would work for em too (granted, now that I think about it I have heard of a couple of people putting adjustable pegs to get more room).

Then again, I've always thought that it was common place for MOST people to change the ergos on a bike in some way to fit them better - just because MOST bikes don't have adjustable seats, bars, controls etc.

I guess even though I've NEVER had to change bars/risers for ergos or shocks for height and seats for height or comfort (granted I've changed a bunch of seats for comfort), I've always thought that most people DO that even if I don't.

 ???

But really, is THAT the biggest issue in your mind of the cylinder placement? Ergos?

[Greg Field]

Greg:  I've admired the Guzzi V Twin of the past when I got off the bike.  When I rode, all I could see was the rocker covers and carbs.  But the feel of that engine - like NOTHING else.  That's what I loved. If making a liquid cooled engine allows Guzzi to be able to sell bikes in Europe in the future and survive, I'll love it.  

Besides, the first woman I took for a ride on my V7 Sport proclaimed loudly when we came to a stop:  "Ooooo, it shakes!"

You should've replied: "No, baby, it throbs!"

[Greg Field]

Greg, my point on ergos was more of corporate similarities. I.E. you know what to expect from Harley, from model-to-model there are huge similarities in fit, feel, finish, controls etc. I would say same goes for Guzzi, that model brand consistency. That such things are part of brand identity.

On awareness, I vehemently disagree that most riders have an unfavorable "awareness" of the brand. In my experiene 9 out of 10 guys get excited when they see a Guzzi. Whether they really "know" the brand or not, MOST people seem to react very positively to the thought/image of a Guzzi.

IF there is a problem with the brand being tarnished, I don't think that comes out until they start doing research and start talking a high percentage of bitchy/crabby owners.

But back to ergos, you bring up a point I find curious, because I seem to be built to fit the average man's bike.

At 5' 10-11" ish, 32" inseam, 225 lbs or so, I seem to be a size where I just kinda fit most bikes.

Cylinders on Guzzis are not in my way, my Breva is fine with the stock seat or the 1" lowered seat, I could ride oilheads with their adjustable seats (on models so equipped) in any of the up to 3 positions, Sportsters fit me, even the lowered models fit well enough etc etc etc.

I'll have to take your word for it if you tell me some people don't fit Guzzi's all that well, but considering some of the lumbering giants that ride Californias, I kinda took it for granted that a Norge or Breva would work for em too (granted, now that I think about it I have heard of a couple of people putting adjustable pegs to get more room).

Then again, I've always thought that it was common place for MOST people to change the ergos on a bike in some way to fit them better - just because MOST bikes don't have adjustable seats, bars, controls etc.

I guess even though I've NEVER had to change bars/risers for ergos or shocks for height and seats for height or comfort (granted I've changed a bunch of seats for comfort), I've always thought that most people DO that even if I don't.

 ???

But really, is THAT the biggest issue in your mind of the cylinder placement? Ergos?

They may like seeing Guzzis, but they sure don't like buying them.

Ergos is but one aspect of the compromises forced by that engine. It's the one people notice first, when they sit on the bike, so it is the one that it's most important to address. There are many more after that.

[Kev m]

They may like seeing Guzzis, but they sure don't like buying them.

Ergos is but one aspect of the compromises forced by that engine. It's the one people notice first, when they sit on the bike, so it is the one that it's most important to address. There are many more after that.

And I honestly think that is more of a Marketing and Dealer Network issue than anything else with some issue on pricing as well (MSRP is too high for bad dealer network and no marketing).

[Pescara]

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).

That's a fair statement, and its also a factor why Piaggio/Aprilia has had failure after failure with sales of their own brands.  The RSV has been their only large displacement motorcycle success, over a decade ago, despite spending huge budgets on new model after new model that failed to sell.

Piaggio is filled with people who think that due to their long history in the Italian scooter market they should be able to command the motorcycle market like another Honda or BMW.  In fact they are a side note in the motorcycle market, and the only way they will ever grow is to accept it. Maybe after years of success as a solid bit player, they could grow in the large displacement motorcycle market. 

Job 1 in accepting and working with their situation might be to market Guzzi from its strengths, which are mainly being a hugely historic marque that attracts people who like simple, elegant machines that do not in any way replicate their competitors.  Preserving and growing those characteristics in every way possible would be a good place to start.

You all say the tradition of factory and place do not matter but that the tradition of a transverse-V engine matters? Why? Nobody buys them. Nobody but a few thousand nutcases around the world is even peripherally aware of the Guzzi V. If Guzzi sticks with that engine and water-cools it, they are doomed to needing all the money Piaggio is willing to lose.

I agree.

[boidorama]

 Guzzi goes all water while Harley and BMW make air/oil cooled models, I'll likely not buy another new Guzzi. And I prefer new bikes, so Guzzi's loss...

or not.....

[ohiorider]

They may like seeing Guzzis, but they sure don't like buying them.

Ergos is but one aspect of the compromises forced by that engine. It's the one people notice first, when they sit on the bike, so it is the one that it's most important to address. There are many more after that.

And I honestly think that is more of a Marketing and Dealer Network issue than anything else with some issue on pricing as well (MSRP is too high for bad dealer network and no marketing).

I am in total agreement with you on this one.  For anyone that truly loves machinery, especially on two wheels, our Guzzis are so damned visceral.  I'm proud to throw a leg over the 1200 Sport after having lunch in our wonderfully yuppy little town of Chagrin Falls, Ohio.  In a sea of Harleys!  These bikes are kick-a** machines, a damned hoot to ride, and deserve better sales and service support across the USA than they currently receive.  New engine?  Maybe, but in addition to the V twin.  Not a replacement.  Many of you remember when BMW was about to drop the flat twin, since it was going to be replaced by the K bike?  Sorry ...... enter the Oilhead a few years later.

Prior to that, BMW built the "Final Editions" of the R100RS and a few other models, only to have to reintroduce the RS (although built on an R80 frame) a few years later.

So, BMW finally figured that they had a couple of customer bases they'd have to satisfy ..... the flat twin guys, and those who wanted a more modern platform.

They really had a screwed-up product mix for a few years (mid 1990s) ...... K bikes (bricks), the new Oilheads, and they were still building the Airhead Type 247 bikes.

Finally, sorted out to Oilhead semi-traditional engines, and newer K series machines, plus middle weight bikes (F Series)

But that's BMW.  They're pushing nearly 100,000 bikes out of the factory each year now.  I'd have to think Guzzi would (a) not get the funding from Piaggio to go on a multi-engine spree, and (b) that it would make little difference if Guzzi had 1-2-3-4-5-6 cylinder engine if the dealer network cannot be expanded and improved (not speaking about the several good dealer out there today, but for me, most of you are a long way off).

Guzzi, take what you have, which to my way of thinking is a nice lineup of bikes with their own endearing qualities, market what you have, support what you have, and bump your annual sales from 5,000 bikes to 10,000 per year. 

Bob

[Greg Field]

Chagrin Falls. What a great name for a town.

[ohiorider]

Chagrin Falls. What a great name for a town.

And a lovely, wealthy little town it is, too!  Middle of town consists of several nice restaurants, some upscale, others moderate but nice, a few that overlook the Chagrin River, a nice stone block arch bridge over the river that overlooks the falls (at least 40-50 foot drop) Starbucks in an old building on one side, and the old popcorn and soda shop on the other.  

And Chagrin Hardware ...... this is as good as it gets.  Hardware Store 19th Century style.  Not a retro, but the real thing.  The wooden floors creak so nicely!  
http://chagrin.doitbest.com/home.aspx

These kinds of towns are one of the main reasons I stay in this part of Ohio.  As you'll see below, many of our towns and rivers are based on the original Indian names.  ex - Chagrin, Cuyahoga, Walhonding ................... ................... .............

Bob

BTW - glad to see you back on WG!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Many fanciful stories have been told about the origin of the name "Chagrin," applied first to the
river and then to the falls, the township and the village, it being often supposed that is comes from the "chagrin" felt by somebody, about something, on its banks. It is, however, undoubtedly derived from the old Indian word "Shaguin," which is to be found applied to it on maps issued before the Revolution. "Shaguin" is supposed to mean "clear," but this is not so certain.

[Seagondollar]

[/b]
Besides, the first woman I took for a ride on my V7 Sport proclaimed loudly when we came to a stop:  "Ooooo, it shakes!"

You should've replied: "No, baby, it throbs!"

Another friend of mine had a girlfriend who threatened to leave him when he sold his Yamaha 650.

He then went off on a string of V7 Sports and a LM1. 


She married him.

[Sack]

My gosh! What's with all this beating up? It's hard to place just where Guzzi needs to head to be more successful (oxymoron) and gain footage in the marketplace for the future. The Transverse V is identifiable but only to those that care. If it weren't this way would we hear questions like who makes those and people offering that they didn't know they were made still. There is practically zilch in the way of advertising and brand awareness.

Personally, if Guzzi is to survive, they will need to modernize and make their bikes stand out and do it at a price commensurate with the desire to own them. Could they enter competition and win on the track? Takes boatloads of money and would take time to prove themselves.

I ask you all this, what would Guzzi have to do to make their bikes desirable to young riders over all the other manufacturers seeking to do the same? Making a better Harley may be a short dream as customers dry up. I hope someone is on top of this.

[ohiorider]

Maybe Guzzi needs to take a hard look at what they currently possess.  

- air cooling - big, heavy, beautiful engine with all those cast cylinder fins
- v twin engine
- capable of producing 110 hp and remain streetable
- a big and torquey bike that makes great mechanical sounds
- a beautiful sport tourer, an adventure tourer, a Griso (can't define it), and a lovely smaller retro bike
- you're not 21 anymore ..... you're at the right age for a Guzzi

I don't know ........ there's so many ways the current product could be marketed.  It should not be marketed head to head with BMW or Triumph.  Piaggio needs to pick the niche, and pick it well, then message to that audience.  This s*** isn't rocket science!

My Gawd, if HD could sell over 200,000 bikes per year for several years, I'd have to believe Guzzi could take their current model mix and move some iron.  It pisses me off when I envision the engineers doing their level best to turn out a really nice machine, only to see defeat because of a lackluster sales/marketing/support organization.  Somebody should be slapped!

Bob

PS - there is something to be said for a big, relatively inefficient air-cooled engine:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQxb-V-rZqA

[Kev m]

Young riders are the vast minority and for the most part they are not buying bikes, especially new ones.

[ohiorider]

Young riders are the vast minority and for the most part they are not buying bikes, especially new ones.

;-T

Bob

[CanadaGuzzi]

I have been following this thread for a few days, and although I am new to Guzzi I will offer my perspective.  I have been a Guzzi fan for years -probably since I first saw magnum force- but have never been able to afford new, and used Guzzis in northern alberta are very rare. 
After several years of saving I was able to buy my new 1200 sport this fall.  I purchased it despite our local dealers, certainly not because of them.  If there is something holding Guzzi sales back (at least in this area) it is the dealers.  There is no passion for the name or the bikes, they are on the floor because they carry a little of everything, but when it comes time to talk about the bikes they would rather push the Triumphs or Suzukis.  At the bike show last month there were THREE Guzzis there; 2009 Stelvio, 2009 750 Breva, 2010 V7 Cafe Classic.  No Norge and no Griso and no dealer who cared to talk about the bikes.  Even the Piaggio rep seemed disinterested.
How can Guzzi possibly sell bikes, (air cooled, water cooled, - it doesn't matter) if there is no one who cares about the bikes to show them off?  Royal Enfield took up more space and probably attracted more new customers than Guzzi did. 
It won't matter one iota what Guzzi does with its engines or its style without dealers who care about the bikes.  If Guzzi has found it's niche in sport tourers, adventure tourers and classic standards then it is time to show the world what they have.
Of course I have no evidence of this, but will add this, in the relatively small city of Chilliwack British Columbia there are probably more Guzzi riders per capita than most other places in north america - and they all speak VERY highly of their local dealer, ( for both wrench skill and passion).  I would imagine you would find the same thing in Seattle around Moto International?
I love Guzzi for all that it is, the style, sound, history, and will continue to support it so long as they provide a product I like.  Does it need to be a transverse twin? No, even though I love it.  Just make it well and make it unique. I could care less that Guzzi is under the Piaggio umbrella, so long as they respect the name and history and keep the bikes unique from their other lines. 
For what its worth I am only 34 yrs old and when I tell people my age what I ride they all say "a what?"
Cheers,
Brock

[Greg Field]

Dealers get enthusiastic about bikes that sell. They get even more enthusiastic about bikes that can be sold for a profit. Dealers lose enthusiasm for bikes that sit on the floor unsold because even when they finally do sell, the dealers have made no money on them. If people were buying these things, the dealers'd be as enthusiastic as you could ask them to be. Blaming it all on dealers isn't going to lead anyone to a workable solution.

[JohnG.]

makes no sense whatsoever to build a LC V-twin & mount it transversely

(a) it doesn't hurt anything.

(b) assuming shaft-drive, it avoids the necessity for a right-angle gear transfer from the crank-shaft.

Lower centre of gravity too... 8)

[suko]

Passion should be admired and embraced  and it seems this site has lots of that. So much of our lives is laking in  that regard. But at the end of the day it is still a mechanical device, a motorcycle. I am sad ( and I hope wrong) that folks might apply this much energy of thought to a bike. There are lots of great ones, pick one and stop bitchin, maybe apply the energy elsewhere. But as I reconsider this I recognize its impossibility,rage on Nay Sayers or advocates it gives us something to talk about.

[JohnG.]

Victory & Canam spyder came to town here a few years back and grew
a following from nothing...
Guzzi (& Aprilia for that matter) arnt really known here but could do the same...
with the right package...He's hopeing  ;-T

[gentlemanjim]

Why all the talk about comparing HD to MG?  HD has one style bike a very narrow focus and has developed a househod name for itself.  Whenever I tell someone (non-bikers) I ride bikes, they say what do you have a Harley.  If I say Ducati, Guzzi or Triumph, they oh I never heard of them.

Guzzi has more in common with BMW, Ducati and Triumph and follwing their lead would be a good thing for the brand.  And yes they both have air and liquid cooled engines.

A Guzzi dealership cannot stand alone in the US.  It needs to be affiliated with a dual dealership.  In my area there are Triumph/Ducati and BMW/Triumph.  A Guzzi/Aprillia was tried locally and failed - two orphan non mainstream brands.  Gotta a have a mainstream brand to draw attention to others.  Ride the shirt tails of these successful bikes and let the prospective buyer looking at the other brand get a gander at the Guzzi line - the only chance they will sell in reasonable numbers - OMO.  Paggio must be smart enough to realize this, hell they build and market personal jets are a leader in the scooter industry and from what I see they have developed a lot of advertising for MG and now new product development.

As the old saying goes "A fool will lose tomorrow while reaching back to yesterday".  We can enjoy our classic and vintage bikes, cars, airplanes, but its new vehicle sales that fuels the industry.

[steffen]

Hi Greg.
Good to have you back on WG.
I do really appreciate your point of view and agree that Guzzi need something new to pay the bills (a diesel, electric, I dunno...)

Now, would you please care to clarify some things for me, that I don't quite get:

How come that guzzi is a failure compared to other iconic aircooled engines: The Harley, BMW boxer and Ducati L-twin (you can even throw the Triumph twin in, if you like).

You once stated, that Piaggio needs to learn the motorcycle business. What do the other brands do right, that Piaggio doesn't?

I think that the Guzzis are getting there in terms of performance. Now they just need to shed 100 lbs  ;D

/Steffen, Denmark