*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[Kev m]

When I started this thread, I did suggest that those who wanted to see the latest pic's of the 1400 go to Guzzitech.com to do so.   I thought that since Todd has his own forum, and he was the one who found the pics and put them there, that the gentlemanly thing I could do was try and send some folks there.  But it seems not everyone was of the same line of thinking, Kev. :( ;)

Like Goose noted, I was just joking about the blown QUOTE tag in your reply to him...

...now that said, regarding your initial post, I have a pet peave when someone posts a link instead of just content (under the circumstances when they could have just posted said content). It's "just another click" some say, but clicks add up to bandwidth and sometimes you don't know the source of the link etc.

Anyway, your post just said there were pics out there, geeez, that's not just one click, that's a bunch.

As for Todd, love the guy, and have happily given him 4 figures of parts business in the last few years. Will be happy to give him more business in the future.

That said, Guzzitech forum has crashed more times in the years I've been going there than Jenn's little sister (you don't want to know how many cars she's killed) and though it's not a bad forum, I tend to not like the format or lack of traffic in certain areas so I don't use it much. No big deal.

Anyway - carry on - it's all good here...

[LowRyter]

Hotrodders will ponder if they could bolt on the 1400 parts to their 8V griso motors to make Super Griso's out of them.  ~;

or LeMans 1400 8V

:bike

 ~; ~; ~; ~;

NOT     :+=copcar

[rocker59]

The question I'm pondering today is whether, or not, the Cal 14 will be available in the classic HD&M paint scheme!

Mmmm!   :food

[Kev m]

There's something wrong with those dimensions. No way that is 285" especially if that seat height dimension is only 21". Unless  missing  or misreading something.

[steveford]

C'mon, really?  Look at how distorted that picture is.  EVERYTHING in that shot is too long and low... unless you think that test rider is half man, half praying mantis.  Some of you guys are going out of your way to find reasons to hate it.  Well, haters gonna hate...

The bike is beautifully proportioned and should sell well (at least, for a Guzzi...).


Hey, even Carlo Guzzi likes it.  Look!  He's looking down at it (from heaven?), smiling.

I like the proportions of this bike much more than my EV's. There's a lot better spacing between the floor boards and the rear pegs. When I ride two up on my current EV the passengers feet hit the back of my legs when I put my feet down, and I see a lot more space to the back pegs in the bottom pic. with the riders feet down.

[Avvocato]

I am cautiously optimistic.  I think we really need to see it in the flesh before passing judgment.

[rocker59]

There's something wrong with those dimensions. No way that is 285" especially if that seat height dimension is only 21". Unless  missing  or misreading something.

285 inches is 23.8 feet.

Sure.  Yeah.  The new Cal 14 is longer than a stretch limo...

[Kev m]

Lol I was actually wondering if he'd meant 285cm and mislabeled it, but it would still be too  long...

[rocker59]

I think we discussed dimensions in one of the other twenty Cal 14 threads.

I still say that it's going to be 63/64 inch wheelbase, 31/32 degree steering head, 26 inch seat height, 600-lbs.

I'll bet I'm close.

[John Ulrich]

A Goldwing has a 66" wheelbase.  Add a faring, bags & trunk and by golly you're close to the first Italian "tour-boat". 

[rocker59]

A Goldwing has a 66" wheelbase.  Add a faring, bags & trunk and by golly you're close to the first Italian "tour-boat".  

Lots of big touring cruisers in the 62" - 64" range.

They're trying to build something that will sell to people that are buying 1/2 the bikes in the USA and a big chunk of the bikes in Europe and elsewhere.

I hope they do it, so they can afford to continue building other (more sporting) Guzzis that I will own and ride.

[rboe]

Oh come on. At least 231Lg.  :pop

 ;D

[rocker59]

Carl,

It's cool that you're playing with some kind of neat toy, but damn?!?!?!?!?!

The Griso has a 62-inch wheelbase.  Do you really think the Cal 14 will be 58/59?

Whatever program you're messing with is wonky.  Why not just get out a ruler and a protractor?  Put them up to the screen and take some measurements.  The front wheel is an 18.  You can base your measurements off that.

It's what I've done with some of the photos.

[rocker59]

So, how 'bout someone with Photoshop overlay a Cal EV photo onto this Cal 14 photo?

Scale off the front wheels.  They're both 18-inchers.

I don't have access to PS right now, or I'd cob something up.

[rocker59]

Okay guys, I messed up royal. I thought the front wheel was 17". Back to the damn program. Tomorrow.

17 is .94444 of 18.

59 is .9444 of 62.5

I'll be curious to see what your program generates when you plug in 18-inches for the front wheel.

 :BEER:

[Vasco DG]

Lots of big touring cruisers in the 62" - 64" range.

They're trying to build something that will sell to people that are buying 1/2 the bikes in the USA and a big chunk of the bikes in Europe and elsewhere.

I hope they do it, so they can afford to continue building other (more sporting) Guzzis that I will own and ride.

Quite!

I also believe that an awful lot of the 'Old Guard' would actually LOVE a bike like this if they could just conquer their prejudices! Nobody is suggesting for a moment that eveyones 'Old Glories' should be sent to the crusher. Good lord! I really do still love all the older models that have been produced in my lifetime. Nor do I have a wish to own a 'Cruiser' of any sort, although something like a Cali, old or new, makes a lot of sense for comfortable touring. Alas I am also now well beyond true 'Sportsbike' territory, my old bod just can't do it any more. That doesn't mean though that I wouldn't love to see a 'Nuovo LeMans/Daytona'. Guzzi has a fantastic heritage of great 'Road Going Sports Bikes' I'll crawl seven miles over broken glass to stick matches in someone's turds to see that heritage continue.

VDG

[Joliet Jim]

The biggest issue you guys are having with trying to figure out the size is you are using computer programs.  This is a guzzi.  You need to get out a slide rule.  For any youngsters google slide rule.

[mtiberio]

...
 I'll crawl seven miles over broken glass to stick matches in someone's turds to see that heritage continue.
...

indeed!!!

[Kev m]

Carl I appreciate the efforts.

Our current guesses:

Rocker - 63/64 inch wheelbase, 26 inch seat height, 600-lbs wet.
Me (from previous thread) - 63" WB, 29" seat height, 650 lbs wet.  (I might revise my seat height guess down to 27-28")

Comparatives:

Cal-Vin - 61.4" WB, 30.7" seat height, 616 lbs wet

FLD (Switchback) - 62.8" WB, 27.4" seat height, 718 lbs wet

Victory Judge - 64.8" WB, 25.9" seat height, ~700 lbs wet estimate

FLHR (Road King) - 63.5" WB, 28" seat height, 812 lbs wet

Victory CrossRoads - 65.7 WB, 26.25" seat height, ~800 lbs wet estimate


So maybe we're coloring our estimates with our wishes, but IF it comes out anything like Rocker or I are guesses it will be a little larger/longer/heavier than the current Tonti Calis, BUT it shouldn't be anywhere near the RK or Crossroads - perhaps putting it closer to the Dyna touring bike (FLD) or Judge.

I think we all hope it doesn't lose much or any cornering clearance.

Honestly, if it fits that bill, I think it will remain a unique and desirable alternative to the FULL BOAT tourers.

[Kev m]

That's a very crowded market, and the VAST majority of sales are Harleys. Other "wanna-bees" have a tough time cracking the market. How many Victorys do you see on the road, bearing in mind that they have now been in production for 14 years? It's a market that is primarily about the brand, not about the functionality of a "touring cruiser".

Guzzi seems like a brand that is struggling to find it's identity, its niche in the market. I can't see them being a full-line manufacturer, not in the short term at least, so they need to establish a core market and then expand from that core. Seemingly random shots at different market segments aren't going to do anything to help them establish that identity amongst non-owners.

I don't disagree that brand image plays a strong part in the sales for that segment.

That said, the TOURING sub-segment of the "cruiser" market is probably the MOST concerned about function.

To offer an answer to your question, I see Victorys about as often (maybe more often) than I see Guzzis in these parts.

That said, I don't necessarily agree that growing the Guzzi brand must be done through narrow focus on one core type of bike.

There's no reason the brand cannot be Italian air/oil cooled, bikes built around the traditional Guzzi engine layout offered in multiple market segments (sporting, sport touring, adventure touring, classic, touring etc).

I would offer up Triumph's success as an example.

They started with "modern" 3-cyl and 4-cyl water-cooled sporting bikes, but didn't really see an explosion of sales until they branched out into the Classics line (neo-Bonnie) all built around the classic air/oil cooled 2-cylinder.

[steveford]

A Goldwing has a 66" wheelbase.  Add a faring, bags & trunk and by golly you're close to the first Italian "tour-boat". 

That's what I'm looking for to tow my camper. ;-T ;-T ;-T ;D ;D ;D ;-T ;-T ;-T

[Moto]

I'll give the wheelbase estimation a shot. It is 66 inches, plus or minus 1.25 [edit: 1.5]  inches. Please bear with me while I explain my method in some detail.

One thing to remember is the difference between the size of the rim where it seats and the diameter of the visible wheel from the side. It's about an inch difference. An 18 inch rim measures about 19 inches viewed from the side. (I just confirmed this rough rule on my Griso: [edit] the rim for its 17 inch front tire is about 18 inches viewed from the side.)

I'll use Carl's first photo, the one with red overlaid lines. Though Carl's shot is nicely scaled to make the front wheel round, this correction doesn't matter in estimating the wheelbase so long as all measurements are made along the horizontal line drawn through the axes.

One problem with the shot is that the front axle does not appear to be at the midpoint of the circle drawn around the rim, because of the angle at which the original photo was taken. So it would be better not to use the center of the axle for the calculations, but rather the center of the circle itself.

What size are the wheels? The front rim measures 54 mm on my laptop screen when blown up to the size I'll use, while the rear is only 50 mm. So I'd agree with the earlier judgement that the front is probably an 18 and the rear a 17 inch tire. This is the biggest, most important assumption of my calculation. Another important assumption is that the front wheel is pointed straight ahead, as it appears to me to be.

My method will be to measure the distance between the rear edge of the front wheel to the rear edge of the rear wheel, which is 186 mm on my screen. I will then account for the different diameters of the two visible wheel rims by adding 54/2 to the measurement to reach the center of the front wheel circle, and subtracting 50/2 to reach the center of the rear wheel circle. This gives a scaled wheel base of 186 + 27 - 25 = 188 mm.

Then on the assumption the front wheel is an 18 inch rim, I will assume the visible rim in the picture is approximately 19 inches in diameter. Since the visible front rim is 54 mm on my screen, the scale is found by the ratio of that distance to 19 inches. Converting the screen measurement to inches while making the calculation gives a scale of (54/25.4) / 19 = 0.1119.

Using this result, the estimated wheel base is 188 / 0.1119 = 1680 mm, or 66.1 inches. (!)

I will try to quantify how much error might be in my estimate. The measurements on the screen are good to +/- 0.5 mm, or about 1/4 inch of real length. Since a sum of inaccurate measurements is part of my method, the final error could be larger (or smaller). But the assumption that the visible front rim is 19 inches is only a rough guess. If it were between the values of 18.75 and 19.25, my estimated wheel base would fall between 64.75 and 67.25 [edit: 67.50] inches, also allowing for the +/- 0.5 mm inaccuracy of my measurements on the screen and the summing of terms.

There you have it: 66 inches. My method (along with my data, the photo itself and the measurements I took from it) is laid out for any criticisms that may come to mind, for which I would be grateful.

I thought about using my slide rule, but didn't.  :)

Moto

[bad Chad]

I can't wait to see the real specs.   It will be fun to see witch one of you pencil necked, pointy headed nerds is closest to the fact. ;D

[Kev m]

Interesting Moto - and well presented.

I have my doubts, if only from a marketing/comparative product standpoint. It just doesn't make sense for Guzzi to go from the current Cali (arguably the shortest wheelbase/best handling "tourer" to the LONGEST wheelbase of the segment).

But time will tell...

[kevdog3019]

BTW... this one is only being offered in "California" to the likes of the Lakers.  There is a shortened version for the rest of us mere mortals.  :P
-Kevin

[youcanrunnaked]

Guzzi seems like a brand that is struggling to find it's identity, its niche in the market. I can't see them being a full-line manufacturer, not in the short term at least, so they need to establish a core market and then expand from that core. Seemingly random shots at different market segments aren't going to do anything to help them establish that identity amongst non-owners.

Random shot?  The California 1400 is a random shot?  Are you joking?

The Moto Guzzi touring bike is part of the brand's heritage, dating to the first V700, continuing with the Ambassador and the Eldorado, and extending through the various California series.  These are not only fine bikes, but an excellent use of the big v-twin.  With the California Vintage an obvious dead-end, what was Moto Guzzi to do?  The California series represents Guzzi's core market, as well as a good 50 years of its motorcycling heritage.

In addition, with the American market polarized into two camps -- cruise/tour and sport/race-replica -- what else is Piaggio to do with Moto Guzzi?  Guzzi has always been about touring bikes.  Even their "sport" bikes aren't all that "sporty," at least by today's standards.  With Aprilia in the Piaggio corporate fold, you will probably never see a true modern sportbike within the Guzzi brand.  Aprilia is the brand that the factory races; Moto Guzzi pulled out of racing over 60 years ago.  The sport/race replica bikes will come from Aprilia.  So, the touring bikes (and "retro" bikes, like the V7) will come from Guzzi.  It makes perfect sense.  The California 1400 is right in line with Guzzi's identity, and the right vehicle to re-estsblish that identity among those who have forgotten that the brand even exists.

OK.  You don't like the bike.  We get that.  But if you honestly think the new Cali is a "random shot," you obviously know nothing about the brand.  

[Moto]

It occurs to me that the front wheel could be a 17, and the rear a 16. If so, my previous estimate would become (18/19) * 66.1, or 62.6 inches, with the same degree of uncertainty as before..

It all depends on the size of the wheel. Two of you said the front wheel is 18 inches. What is the source of this information, please?

[Kev m]

It occurs to me that the front wheel could be a 17, and the rear a 16. If so, my previous estimate would become (18/19) * 66.1, or 62.6 inches, with the same degree of uncertainty as before..

Now THAT (62.6") sounds much more believable...

[Moto]

Now THAT (62.6") sounds much more believable...

Yes. Garbage in, garbage out, is the rule.

[Gary]

The Norge is a tourer, this is a cruiser.

The Norge is a "johnny come lately" addition to the long history of Moto Guzzis. It is indeed a fine touring bike. My California EV Touring is also a fine touring bike. I imagine more riders tour on California's than Norge's. The California 1400 seems to be a logical extension of the venerable California style line.