*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[Kev m]

John,

For at least half of the most profitable and prolific years of their sales history (meaning about 10 of the past 20 years) Harleys had less than 80-90 ft.lbs. of torque at the rear wheel and pathetic 50-80 roll on.

Again I found 1340cc with more weight and less power than a CARC just fine for touring for thousands of miles.

I don't fault you for wanting more, but I don't expect judgement from you for wanting less.

Frankly 90% of the riders of these bikes don't need more,  nor would they know what to do with it and I lament that they are the driving force in making these bikes bigger and bigger for no good reason.

[braunsan]

 :BEER:

This is one of the better fights I've seen on here for awhile...

I won't be in the market for the 1400, primarily because it is ugly, but that's truly useless in this discussion...  2nd issue - how much is the thing going to weigh?  I don't have any problem with hp - more is better... except I'd generally take the same hp/wt ratio on a lighter, less powerful machine...  Me, wife & gear is a small percentage of my riding, so even though I appreciate the argument about getting around the line of campers on a 6% uphill in MT, that really isn't that much of an issue.  I spend so much time over 100mph already, on a fat old 1064 cruiser ('04 Stone - recent computer/dyno tune and radial tires), that I will either have my license revoked or be dead before Guzzi gets the 1400 to the US.  A suspension upgrade, radial tires, and new, properly tuned carbs on my old /5 probably would have kept me grinnin', too, for that matter, if the engine hadn't finally expired after a long and joyous life...

If I wanted a sportbike, or a modern sport-tourer with 110hp at less than 600lbs fueled, I'd have one.  If I wanted a narrow angle v-twin, I'd have one.  Don't mean this to be anything more than genial disagreement with Orange Guzzi, but I'll never buy a Guzzi that isn't an air cooled 90 degree v-twin with shaft drive - nobody else builds it.  I happen to think that is the optimum arrangement for a retro-tourer that goes plenty fast enough to scare me.  I plan to have something with that arrangement in the stable forever - I don't really care if it is Italian, but there is some cache to red exotics...

The 1400 will probably fail, regardless of it's talents, because it doesn't 'market' as well as any of it's competition.  Guzzi's winning bikes are the continued Tonti/CA flavor of the year, the V7C, and the Stelvio.  Look at resale numbers.  The bike they should be building is a CARC based V1000S/V1100S/V1200S retro Lemans (ie, take the Bellagio and put the right tank/fenders on it to result in a modern version of the 1000S, the then modern version of the 850 Lemans, which was an 'update' of the V7 Sport)...  would it expand market - not really, but when has Guzzi EVER expanded their market.  Their problem remains marketing and dealer support, not the bikes.

My next 3 bikes might be (in no likely order):  A SXV 5.5 (to which I will add custom wheels with dual purpose tires - I live in a rural area with unpoliced, well maintained gravel roads and barely policed curvy blacktops), a Virago 250 (to customize and ride around town, then teach my kids on), and a running /5 or /6 airhead to share with my brother and swap engine/tranny components into the /5 I inherited from my uncle...  I'll probably change my mind 6 times on what I want next before I get to actually buying anything, but a bike that outweighs my Stone won't be an option.

If Guzzi wants to get me to talk good about the company to everyone that asks me about my goofy bike, they should start with a second or third competent dealership in my state.  I really don't give a rat's rear about the 1400, but I would like to see the company stay in business, and I don't think the 1400 is the solution.  :BEER: :BEER: :BEER:

[braunsan]

John,

For at least half of the most profitable and prolific years of their sales history (meaning about 10 of the past 20 years Harleys had less than 80-90 ft.lbs. of torque at the rear wheel and pathetic 50-80 roll on.

Again I found 1340cc with more weight and less power than a CARC just fine for touring for thousands of miles.

I don't fault you for wanting more, but I don't expect judgement from you for wanting less.

Frankly 90% of the riders of these bikes don't need more,  nor would they know what to do with it and I lament that they are the driving force in making these bikes bigger and bigger for no good reason.

 ;-T

[Skeeve]

Moto Guzzi could build a bike that is not an air cooled, 90 degree transverse v-twin.   Not all motorcycle  manufactures use the same engine configuration on all their models.   Although I did buy a Guzzi for the air cooled 90 degree transverse v-twin.   I do like the older bikes with their simple engine design.   When people mention BMW or H D engines, most people think of the 180 degree or 45 degree engines.  Both these companies build other types of engines for their bikes.  My 1064 cc engine is more than enough for what I like to do on a bike.

You're in luck! Moto Guzzi in fact, does build a bike that is not an air-cooled, 90deg transverse v-twin! In fact, all the motorcycles it builds are air-cooled, 90deg inline twins!* I'm sorry you bought your Guzzi thinking you were going to get a configuration they haven't built for over 50 years, but perhaps you were thinking of a Ducati?
;D

* - Since any engineer or serious motor-head will tell ya, "transverse" & "in-line" refer to the crankshaft axis of rotation in relation to the vehicle's major axis. Just doing my part to correct the popular misconception...  ;-T

[Orange Guzzi]

Moto Guzzi could build a bike that is not an air cooled, 90 degree transverse v-twin.   Not all motorcycle  manufactures use the same engine configuration on all their models.   Although I did buy a Guzzi for the air cooled 90 degree transverse v-twin.   I do like the older bikes with their simple engine design.   When people mention BMW or H D engines, most people think of the 180 degree or 45 degree engines.  Both these companies build other types of engines for their bikes.  My 1064 cc engine is more than enough for what I like to do on a bike.

You're in luck! Moto Guzzi in fact, does build a bike that is not an air-cooled, 90deg transverse v-twin! In fact, all the motorcycles it builds are air-cooled, 90deg inline twins!* I'm sorry you bought your Guzzi thinking you were going to get a configuration they haven't built for over 50 years, but perhaps you were thinking of a Ducati?
;D

your going to get on my ignore list.

I was actually thinging of Ducati before my first Guzzi.

* - Since any engineer or serious motor-head will tell ya, "transverse" & "in-line" refer to the crankshaft axis of rotation in relation to the vehicle's major axis. Just doing my part to correct the popular misconception...  ;-T

[krglorioso]

Seems like in one of the Guzzi books I have about, Dr John Wittner (sp?) pretty clearly laid out how he and the factory could find no significant and reliable dimension increase with the current architecture. Throw of the crank journal, stud spacing, block rigidity and the like.

It seems to me that this line of argument is valid only if the original spec crankcase is used.  An all-new crankcase should support whatever size engine it is designed for.  Norton got into trouble when it tried to expand the 500cc Dominator of the early 1950s (I had one) into an 850 (actually, 828cc.  I have one) but the new 951cc Nortons should have no trouble handling the displacement increase since the engine is designed and built to support that displacement.

What say, Lannis?

Ralph

[Vasco DG]

Seems like in one of the Guzzi books I have about, Dr John Wittner (sp?) pretty clearly laid out how he and the factory could find no significant and reliable dimension increase with the current architecture. Throw of the crank journal, stud spacing, block rigidity and the like.

A few things that people seem to have overooked.

1.) The 8V motor, despite outward appearance and a few similarities to the 'old' motor that even the Daytona/Centauro Hi-Cams were based on is effectively an entirely NEW motor. Even the factory press releases made a lot of noise about how many new parts and variations there are in it compared to the 'Older' motors.

2.) John Wittner was, and no doubt still is, an enormously tallented and driven man but he has been effectively 'Out of the loop' since the late 1990's so saying that he 'Knew such and such' is about as relevant to the 'New' Hi Cam as expecting Alexander the Great to be able to saddle up in the 21'st century and go and conquor the Levant and North Africa!

By saying these things I've probably commited some sort of 'Corn Cob Pipe Sacrelige' but I'm sorry, the truth sometimes hurts. It is no more 1994 than it is 1967 which is where some people's brains seem to have ossified.

If you want an 'old' bike? Fine! I have several myself. It's just that not everyone wants to stop still and remain fixed like some sort of bug in amber. I have faith in the cleverness, if not the wisom, of 'ooman beenz. If we stop going forward in any sort of endeavour the only thing that faces us is extinction. I'm not ready to hand in my genetic code just yet!!!! ;D

VDG

[JohninVT`]

Lannis, you act so old I'm tempted to ask if rainbows were in black and white when you were a kid.  There is nothing wrong with fast motorcycles or cars.  Folks who enjoy them are, for the most part, normal.  I like Hayabusa's but prefer the ZX-14 and I know what a terrific sport touring bike one would make.  I'd ride a Boss Hoss with a Corvette engine just to see what it was like.  I also have a weak spot for BSA A10's, Douglas Dragonfly's and Ariel Square Fours so it's not like I measure the worth of every bike by its' power output alone.

One of the most important spec's in a cruiser(for me) is the 50-80mph roll on performance.  If Guzzi is going to put one out and not make excuses for it...then it should have more than 80ft/lbs at the rear wheel.  The touring Harley's all do and their fuel injection is light years better than Guzzi's.  I just rode a friend's brand new Streetglide the other day and it takes the throttle better than any other FI bike I can remember riding.  It's perfect.  My 1200 Sport was a stumbling, surging pig by comparison even after all the work I did to it.  It seems like some people want to keep patting themselves on the back for riding an antiquated, slow, Italian anachronism with piss poor resale value.  I'd prefer riding a Guzzi with some actual nuts. 

A CARC cruiser with a bored out 8 valve is bad how?  Just because it might displace 1400cc's?  That is one of the dumbest things I've seen posted on this forum.  Hand wringing and forehead slapping amongst the Guzzisti!  Poor bastards! 

Feel free to go back to spirited discussions about the joys of the Metzeler 880, steelcut oats and how you used to sit next to Jesus in grade school.  Thank you....please drive through.             

I know.  I feel really bad now.  You're like that World's Most Interesting Man in the beer commercial - a wild, crazy, popular guy with a long, honorable juvenile rap sheet who loves fast cars and motorcycles, good liquor, strong drugs, and blazing hot women.

I've always wanted to be like that; living life to the fullest, living right on the edge, seeing every experience through a focused blend of testosterone and adrenalin, and feeling sorry for the poor, slogging slugs like me that just don't know how to get the most out of life with their pitiful little 750cc motorcycles and boring, sad experiences.

Well, there's always hope, I guess.   Maybe some day I'll have a Walter Mitty moment, break Western, and for one shining, glowing moment experience life the way you do.   That way, it will all be worth while ..... I will have been ALMOST LIKE Vermont John ..... :D :D

The fact you're an old, miserable, judgemental tool who enjoys pissing in everyone's Cheerio's is only partially relevant.  How is a 1400cc CARC equiped Guzzi a bad thing?  You keep going on and on about how Guzzi is going to fail and that bigger isn't better.  What is your real issue with the bike?  Is it the 1400cc displacement?  Would 1300cc meet with your approval?  Should it be a 750?  Last I knew you were raving about how great your 95hp Stelvio 8 valve is compared to your previous bike so you strike me as a gigantic hypocrit.  Why aren't you hauling your fat ass around on a Falcone with your wife and camping gear on the back?  Could it be that the Stelvio's 1200cc's is...gasp...better suited for that task?  Could it be that bigger really is better in some cases? 

If by being like me you have an open mind about motorcycles and enjoy all sizes, styles, shapes and aspects of them...then that's great.  If I wanted to be like you I'd cut 4 inches off my penis, gain 200 pounds and give myself a lobotomy with a Dremel.   

[Lannis]

Seems like in one of the Guzzi books I have about, Dr John Wittner (sp?) pretty clearly laid out how he and the factory could find no significant and reliable dimension increase with the current architecture. Throw of the crank journal, stud spacing, block rigidity and the like.

It seems to me that this line of argument is valid only if the original spec crankcase is used.  An all-new crankcase should support whatever size engine it is designed for.  Norton got into trouble when it tried to expand the 500cc Dominator of the early 1950s (I had one) into an 850 (actually, 828cc.  I have one) but the new 951cc Nortons should have no trouble handling the displacement increase since the engine is designed and built to support that displacement.

What say, Lannis?

Ralph

Good point, and I don't disagree that a fully engineered solution might enable a company to "force" an iconic design into larger and larger displacements without coming apart.     As you say, Norton didn't do it with their expanded 500cc, and the jury's deliberating on whether BMW has done themselves any favors in turning their twin from a 600cc that was the undisputed king of quality and balance in its day, to a 1000/1100/1200cc bike that many people don't believe is as good.

Question is, is Guzzi helping themselves by chasing Harley Davidson and Victory into the displacement stratosphere while trying to maintain their trademark design?    My opinion and impression (along with several others here, apparently) is no.    Others think it might be.   

I'm with Pete, well outside the "target demographic" for this item.

Lannis

[JohninVT`]

Your wife lacks taste and obviously has shallow genitalia.     

You still haven't answered the question.  Why is your 1200cc, 600+pound Stelvio the best thing since sliced bread but a 1400cc Cali would cause the sky to fall?          

[Vasco DG]

Jeez! Youse blokes are like a pair of angry, shrieking Queens at the Sydney Mardi-Gras! Yer almost as bad as some of the Prima Donnas on the Gloomy board! Lighten up FFS!!!!

VDG

[Digitaltown]

So does the Norge 8V. It's a big, fan assisted, thermostat controlled oil cooler.

Look, I may be quite wrong. It may be an entirely NEW motor. But just consider a few things.

Piaggio have spent a LOT of money developing the 8V oil/air cooled motor and are continuing to make refinements to it and use it in a variety of platforms. Developing a new motor from scratch, (And that is effectively what the 8V motor is.) is NOT cheap and would of been looked at as a mid to long term project, especially for a small brand like Guzzi which has a notoriously conservative and fickle customer base and THEY are who the new Cali is squarely aimed at. Most riders who aren't rusted on to the Guzzi brand and engine architechture aren't going to look at something like a Cali when they can get a Shadow or an HD cheaper.

I found a higher resolution image from the show and blew it up in photoshop and tried a few other tricks to get a better look at the front end of the engine...better image at http://automotivetreenplus.com/moto-guzzi-california-cruiser-will-v7-launches-scrambler/2012-moto-guzzi-california-cruiser/

The bit that looks like a radiator/cooler I reckon at most is an oil cooler or some kind of strenghtener for the front of the engine. My only reason for saying that is that there only seems to be 2 engine mounts at the front that can be seen just in front of cylinder. I'd put my money on the oil cooler. This does seem to be a bored out version of the latest generation of engines, this makes sense as there is plenty of room to bore them out that bit further. The heads do seem to be a different shape so could be new, if they are I imagine they would be able to be bored out to 1800cc in a few years time.

The engine is going to be a structural element as on most bikes which for Guzzi saves a lot of manufacture costs as the current cali frame is very expensive to make so this would help reduce costs or boost profits.
I've been trying to get more details through my dealers and would have gone down to Italy for the celebrations if I wasn't on a plane to Poland as I would hope they would reveal more. I'm hoping the bike will appear next year, if it does I'd certainly consider it as at the moment it's that or a Stelvio.

I like the reduction in chrome....I don't rate Guzzi chrome and those wheels have got to be easier to clean than spokes on my Stone. I reckon it would make a great cruiser/tourer.
I imagine the mudguards, tank and tail are all plastic...again a plus point for me as it's less work on salt encrusted roads in winter, the only concern being if the engine is hot it will warm a full tank of fuel very quickly so no filling up after a long ride.
Brakes look powerful enough to stop a freight train and I would imagine the engine and transmission would be easier to remove than a current cali so hopefully fairly simple maintainance.

My only concerns are the size of the fuel tank, how much volume is lost to the heads as I like a decent range on a bike and also if it's heavier will it wear the tyres out faster. All important for long tours.

[JohninVT`]

Jeez! Youse blokes are like a pair of angry, shrieking Queens at the Sydney Mardi-Gras! Yer almost as bad as some of the Prima Donnas on the Gloomy board! Lighten up FFS!!!!

VDG

I'm laughing actually.  It's raining cats and dogs so I can't work today.  Trolling Lannis is more fun than poking a beehive with a short stick.  

I still think a re-tuned 8 valve with more torque would make for a wonderful cruiser engine.  I simply don't see why 1400cc's is so objectionable.  The 8 valve is the best thing to happen to Guzzi in the last 30 years.

[Kev m]

Don't get me wrong, as long as it's air-cooled, I'll consider it.

At least it should have tubeless tires, external oil filter,  stronger charging system,  better brakes, probably better suspension and seat than my Jackal.

[Lannis]

Jeez! Youse blokes are like a pair of angry, shrieking Queens at the Sydney Mardi-Gras! Yer almost as bad as some of the Prima Donnas on the Gloomy board! Lighten up FFS!!!!

VDG

I'm laughing actually.  It's raining cats and dogs so I can't work today.  Trolling Lannis is more fun than poking a beehive with a short stick.  

I still think a re-tuned 8 valve with more torque would make for a wonderful cruiser engine.  I simply don't see why 1400cc's is so objectionable.  The 8 valve is the best thing to happen to Guzzi in the last 30 years.

I'm laughing too.   It's called "playin de dozens".

"Yo' momma is so fat ... "    It's an old game.    And I still don't see why finding 1400cc objectionable is so objectionable.

   ???   :D  Lannis

[cruzziguzzi]

Look at the pictures of the 1400 Cali and you an plainly see it is a version of the 8V motor. The 8v has been designed to be bored larger. look at the spigots on the barrels, the walls are a good centimetre + thick.

Despite outward appearances the 8V motor is COMPLETLY DIFFERENT to the old 2-valve pushrod motor.The stud spacing is different and because the idler shaft for the camchain drive doesn't carry cam lobes there are no clearance issues with the big ends of the rods biffing the lobes. Whether that means there is room for further stroke increases I don't know but boriing for capacity is easy.

While it is only my guess I'm suspecting that the reason for the very high domes on the rocker covers is because there wille a second plug in each combustion chamber to combat low speed surging events. They are most likely purely cosmetic. If there is one thing that concerns me about increasing the motor's size it is the possibility of the brather system being unable to cope. Only time will tell whether they have increased it's ability toseparate oil from gas.

also I very much doubt it'll be water-cooled. As I said the pics look like a standard 8V, oil cooled with air assist, motor. The large radiator at the front will simply be a fan-forced oil cooler as is fitted to the Norge 8V.

VDG

Given my general outlook which tries to deny the existence of engines with too many; valves, cams or pumps - I've never looked at the 8 valve enough to even recognize that it was an entirely different engine. In spite of my blindly following Ned Ludd - I take heart in the fact that MG is (or was) producing 3 completely separate engines at the same time as well as 3 different final drives.

[LowRyter]

anything that gives you more power but with less weight, less heat, & less bulk


 ~;

[Tom]

FI bikes with fuel pumps could have their gas tanks any where on a bike.  Why not?

[Kev m]

Why not? 

Ask the families or surviving owners of a couple of fuel in frame Victory Visions that burned to a crisp in a collision.

I don't think a fuel tank up front is a good idea.

[Semper-guzzi]

I'm all for a 1400 if it's efficient for the HP/TQ if not I'll keep my 1064. But I really don't like the styling of this new Cali. Tank and exhaust are all wrong for me. I agree the wheels would be easier to clean but I dont even clean mine as they are now (that's what rain is for). All for the new bike just not liking the way it looks. Scrambler looks sweet tho. To each their own I suppose.

[youcanrunnaked]

If I wanted to be like you I'd cut 4 inches off my penis, gain 200 pounds and give myself a lobotomy with a Dremel.   

Oh, snap!  Maybe it's wrong to encourage such comments, but I LOL'ed.

On a more civil note, Lannis, do you really think MG is chasing H-D and Victory with the California 1400?  Really?  Please explain how a longitudinal 1400cc 90 degree v-twin with shaft drive is at all like a tranverse 1700 or 1800cc narrow-angle v-twin with belt drive.  They don't look, feel, sound, or ride at all alike.  Apples and oranges.   

[Kev m]

Actually Youcan, lots of people here usually hate to hear it but there's long been parallels between MG &  HD.

The entire California line has always been called the Italian Harley for a reason.

My Jackal feels very similar to Harleys in a lot of ways. Certainly more similar than different.

[HDGoose]

Actually Youcan, lots of people here usually hate to hear it but there's long been parallels between MG &  HD.

The entire California line has always been called the Italian Harley for a reason.

My Jackal feels very similar to Harleys in a lot of ways. Certainly more similar than different.

The California line traces directly to 1967 Harley police bike via LAPD and CHP.

[Chicago Mark]

The only thing I don't like about the Cali 1400 is I don't know more about it and that I don't have one in my garage. I must have looked at the goofy picture Piaggio showed months ago 1000 times so far. IMHO. it has the potential to replace both my Griso 8v and the Valkyrie Intetstate. From the bad Piaggio photo, even the seat to floor board distance looks good.

Time will tell,

Mark

[the Bailey]

Lannis, you act so old I'm tempted to ask if rainbows were in black and white when you were a kid.  There is nothing wrong with fast motorcycles or cars.  Folks who enjoy them are, for the most part, normal.  I like Hayabusa's but prefer the ZX-14 and I know what a terrific sport touring bike one would make.  I'd ride a Boss Hoss with a Corvette engine just to see what it was like.  I also have a weak spot for BSA A10's, Douglas Dragonfly's and Ariel Square Fours so it's not like I measure the worth of every bike by its' power output alone.

One of the most important spec's in a cruiser(for me) is the 50-80mph roll on performance.  If Guzzi is going to put one out and not make excuses for it...then it should have more than 80ft/lbs at the rear wheel.  The touring Harley's all do and their fuel injection is light years better than Guzzi's.  I just rode a friend's brand new Streetglide the other day and it takes the throttle better than any other FI bike I can remember riding.  It's perfect.  My 1200 Sport was a stumbling, surging pig by comparison even after all the work I did to it.  It seems like some people want to keep patting themselves on the back for riding an antiquated, slow, Italian anachronism with piss poor resale value.  I'd prefer riding a Guzzi with some actual nuts. 

A CARC cruiser with a bored out 8 valve is bad how?  Just because it might displace 1400cc's?  That is one of the dumbest things I've seen posted on this forum.  Hand wringing and forehead slapping amongst the Guzzisti!  Poor bastards! 

Feel free to go back to spirited discussions about the joys of the Metzeler 880, steelcut oats and how you used to sit next to Jesus in grade school.  Thank you....please drive through.             

I know.  I feel really bad now.  You're like that World's Most Interesting Man in the beer commercial - a wild, crazy, popular guy with a long, honorable juvenile rap sheet who loves fast cars and motorcycles, good liquor, strong drugs, and blazing hot women.

I've always wanted to be like that; living life to the fullest, living right on the edge, seeing every experience through a focused blend of testosterone and adrenalin, and feeling sorry for the poor, slogging slugs like me that just don't know how to get the most out of life with their pitiful little 750cc motorcycles and boring, sad experiences.

Well, there's always hope, I guess.   Maybe some day I'll have a Walter Mitty moment, break Western, and for one shining, glowing moment experience life the way you do.   That way, it will all be worth while ..... I will have been ALMOST LIKE Vermont John ..... :D :D

The fact you're an old, miserable, judgemental tool who enjoys pissing in everyone's Cheerio's is only partially relevant.  How is a 1400cc CARC equiped Guzzi a bad thing?  You keep going on and on about how Guzzi is going to fail and that bigger isn't better.  What is your real issue with the bike?  Is it the 1400cc displacement?  Would 1300cc meet with your approval?  Should it be a 750?  Last I knew you were raving about how great your 95hp Stelvio 8 valve is compared to your previous bike so you strike me as a gigantic hypocrit.  Why aren't you hauling your fat ass around on a Falcone with your wife and camping gear on the back?  Could it be that the Stelvio's 1200cc's is...gasp...better suited for that task?  Could it be that bigger really is better in some cases? 

If by being like me you have an open mind about motorcycles and enjoy all sizes, styles, shapes and aspects of them...then that's great.  If I wanted to be like you I'd cut 4 inches off my penis, gain 200 pounds and give myself a lobotomy with a Dremel.   

lol. i too had the penis reduction surgery. thought i was the only one.

[Digitaltown]

Okay, my 2 cents worth. The fuel tank looks absurdly low and with it pushed down over the frame and cylinder heads so much, it may not be a fuel tank at all. Several bikes have their fuel tanks under the rider and the "tank" is just a cover. What if MG chose to lower the center of mass down and forward by placing the fuel tank at the front of the engine? What I'm seeing on that photograph would certainly fall in the large enough for a fuel tank category. Well, it's a weird thought but Moto Guzzi has been the first at several things in motorcycle history, why not the first with a fore-mounted fuel tank? I'm not going to ponder how that would work in a severe fork-bending accident nor how handling would change in regards to the tank fill.

I hadn't thought about them moving the fuel tank or doing as they did with the Stelvio where the tank is just a cover for the tank.

Looking again at the picture there would be room for a large tank if it ran down from under the "dummy tank" to the space between the side panels. That would also drop the centre of gravity quite nicely and allow them to put all the electrics under the dummy tank.

Tye more I look at that structure in front of the engine the more I think it's a plastic cover, the top section over an oil cooler I suspect. I was looking at the way the light reflects of the black material just in front of the bend on the exhaust. It reflects as if it's not smooth but rather that slightly rough plastic material you get, bit like the 1100 Breva had as a cover low down on the engine.

[dnovo]

Actually Youcan, lots of people here usually hate to hear it but there's long been parallels between MG &  HD.

The entire California line has always been called the Italian Harley for a reason.

My Jackal feels very similar to Harleys in a lot of ways. Certainly more similar than different.
[/quote]

The California line traces directly to 1967 Harley police bike via LAPD and CHP.
[/quote]

Goose has an excellent point.  The California Vintage is an outstanding recreation -- with modern updates -- on the original Guzzi 'police' bikes.  If you read any of the many available histories of Guzzi, you will see that this series was designed and very successfully marketed to the LAPD, CHP, and many other police departments worldwide as a rival to the Harley police models.  The now discontinued Cal Vintage recreated the look and function of the 60s and 70s police specials using the latest 1100 motor with fuel injection and other upgrades, triple Brembos, steering damper and the best available suspension to build the 'best Bagger Harley never built'.

When I saw the proposed 1400 that is supposed to replace it, my dealer found the last new in crate for me and I bought.

What did I get?  A great long range, fast, comfortable and dead reliable ride.  On runs on our wide open and sometimes winding roads here in SE Wisconsin, my sport bike friends are amazed they have trouble keeping up with me.  At the end of a two or three hour run, I they get off a bit stiff or tired and I feel as good as I did when I started.  Can't cover ground as fast or go around corners like that on a Harley.

Any issues with the stock Vintage?  Only one, the standard windshield is too short, and buffeting leads to vibrations felt strongly through your hemet at anything over 65.  Easy cure is the taller, wider Rifle screen, a five or ten minute bolt on to the stock mounts.  Cruise in comfort at 80 if you want at 4000 rpm, right in the fat part of the power band.

Sometimes newer is not necessarily better.  For what this bike was designed for, the 1100 provides all the power needed.  Dave

[moltoguzzi]

My only concerns are the size of the fuel tank, how much volume is lost to the heads as I like a decent range on a bike and also if it's heavier will it wear the tyres out faster. All important for long tours.

Seem to me they moved the tank under the seat and the electronics where the the tank used to be, remove the cover and its all there in one place. Luckily it still looks oil cooled with better valve covers for cooling and looks. I believe they have a winner alla Stelvio/Norge and Piaggio(Aprilia) has done a good job with quality/engineering/tuning, the results of their vast top level racing experience. I look forward to a cruiser that can keep up with most of the large bore cruisers sold here in the "off the line 'torque' acceleration" with a Guzzi nameplate on it.  

[Kev m]

A tank cover isn't necessarily a bad idea if they actually care about the possibility of tank expansion/deformation when exposed to ethanol.

Yeah you can still have problems, but as long as they build a little room for the expanion at least you won't ever get visible warpong or other deformation.

I kinda think that's why they went that route on the newer Ducatis (like Jenn's Monster).

[JohninVT`]

A tank cover isn't necessarily a bad idea if they actually care about the possibility of tank expansion/deformation when exposed to ethanol.

Yeah you can still have problems, but as long as they build a little room for the expanion at least you won't ever get visible warpong or other deformation.

I kinda think that's why they went that route on the newer Ducatis (like Jenn's Monster).

A tank cover is also a great place to stuff an airbox and ECU.  As soon as you move the fuel, it allows you to relocate other items that were previously hard to reach.  It would be awfully nice to pop the "tank" cover and have a fuse panel, ECU, main harness and air filter element all easily accessible. 

If the fuel is under the seat, that frees up a lot of room between and over the cylinders.  It could be a very nice mechanical/electrical layout.