*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[Kev m]

Told ya! :D

Yup, but you are wrong about sooo many things that I was hoping this was one of them... :-*  ;)   :BEER:

[youcanrunnaked]

If the extra length of the Cali 1400 translates to a better two-up experienced than the Tonti California (IMO, the Tonti-framed bike is okay for two-up, but could be better), then I don't have a problem with it.

I don't have a problem with any of the specs except weight.  I'm glad the dresser model is lighter than a Road King (the obvious competitor), but I wish it was at least 100 lbs lighter.  However, as long as the suspension is firmer than the pillow-soft RK, and the lean angles are greater, the weight shouldn't be that big of a deal.

[Chicago Mark]

If the extra length of the Cali 1400 translates to a better two-up experienced than the Tonti California (IMO, the Tonti-framed bike is okay for two-up, but could be better), than I don't have a problem with it.

I don't have a problem with any of the specs except weight.  I'm glad the dresser model is lighter than a Road King (the obvious competitor), but I wish it was at least 100 lbs lighter.  However, as long as the suspension is firmer than the pillow-soft RK, and the lean angles are greater, the weight shouldn't be that big of a deal.

+1. I think the current Tonti framed Cali's make a very poor two up motorcycle. I have zero interest in the Stelvio even though some say it does ok for two up duty. Bring on the big bad 'new' California.

Mark

[Kev m]

I just have to wonder if they needed to add 2-3 inches more wheelbase than even the RK (an excellent 2-up machine) to get there.

It's almost as if they said, ok, the competition has a couple inches more wheelbase than us, HEY, LET'S NOT ONLY MATCH EM, LET'S BEAT EM...

It's just a LOT of wheelbase.

I guess I've moved from the "cautiously optimistic camp" to the "hope I like it better in person" camp.

On the other hand, maybe it makes the FLD look even better in my book - just have to fit dual discs to it along with a taller suspension.

[Moto]

My Goodness!  1685mm wheelbase = 66.34-inches!   :o

So, I win the wheelbase-guessing prize, having estimated 66.1 [edit] inches from the old photo? Yes?

Moto

Here was my calculation:

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

[Kev m]

So, I win the wheelbase-guessing prize, having estimated 66.1 [edit] inches from the old photo? Yes?

YUP  :bow, but I'm SOOOO sorry you were right...  ;)

[rocker59]

YUP  :bow, but I'm SOOOO sorry you were right...  ;)

 :+1

 :BEER:

[youcanrunnaked]

+1. I think the current Tonti framed Cali's make a very poor two up motorcycle. I have zero interest in the Stelvio even though some say it does ok for two up duty. Bring on the big bad 'new' California.

Mark

I wouldn't say "poor," but this probably depends on the size, weight, and expectations of the two people on the bike.  YMMV.

For me, I find that my Cali is okay for two-up.  I think it would be even nicer with a better seat, which I am investigating.  (I am leaning towards a Ned's Comfort Seat.  Just need to reconcile my wants with the $400 price tag.)

What I find to be a problem is putting my feet down at a stop.  For me, there isn't enough space between my passenger's foot on the passenger pegs, and the area behind the floorboards, for me to put my feet down behind the floorboard without the back of my calves bumping against the toes of my passenger.  I can avoid this if I put my feet down to the outside of the floorboards, but the seat is too high for me to do that and flat-foot the bike at a stop.  So, I either accept the contact and try to ignore it, or balance the bike on the balls of my feet.  It's a design compromise that I am willing to live with.  I don't ride two-up very often, and I appreciate the nimbleness of my Cali.  For what it is, I think it handles great.

I hope that the extra length of the new 1400 went toward better two-up comfort.  Otherwise, what's the point?  As long as that sweet Cali handling has not been compromised, IMO, the wheelbase and the weight are just numbers on a page.

[poorBob]

Not comprehensive but nice pic and a couple specs:

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/11/moto-guzzi-california-1400-production-imminent-engine-specs-revealed/



(merged)  R59

[Mad Mac]

Here is another bit: http://cmgonline.com/news/2012/11/02/moto-guzzi-california-1400-specs-released/

[mtiberio]

I for one would be looking to replace my 700# 1700cc Yamaha RoadStar with one of the new 1400s. Sounds like Guzzi hit the sweet spot...

[bpreynolds]

+1. I think the current Tonti framed Cali's make a very poor two up motorcycle.
Mark

"Poor" compared to what, a Goldwing?  Just more fuel for the subjective fire, but me and my wife have found the Calis to be the best 2-up bikes we've ever driven together.  And too, though 2-up comfort is almost as personal as taste, I do believe we had a poll or something to that effect on wg some time ago and while answers varied tremendously as expected, I "think" I recall correctly that the Calis were judged as the slim overall winner for 2-up work.  But I agree this new and longer version of the Cali offers some interesting prospects.

[Kev m]

"Poor" compared to what, a Goldwing?  Just more fuel for the subjective fire, but me and my wife have found the Calis to be the best 2-up bikes we've ever driven together.  And too, though 2-up comfort is almost as personal as taste, I do believe we had a poll or something to that effect on wg some time ago and while answers varied tremendously as expected, I "think" I recall correctly that the Calis were judged as the slim overall winner for 2-up work. 

As you asked - overall winner for 2-up work, compared to WHAT?

Jenn and I certainly took a trip or two on the Jackal 2-up before she started riding her own (was that one of the motivating factors of getting her own license, hmmm, dunno).

But there's no question something like a Road King/FLH is more comfortable for me (and probably most people).

I know, I know, some people toured 2-up on 350s too, whatever, no thanks.

[bpreynolds]

As you asked - overall winner for 2-up work, compared to WHAT?

Sorry I did not clarify in my earlier post.  I meant in comparison to other MGs.  Here's the thread, "What is the best 2-up bike in all of Guzzidom".  Nothing definitive here by any means since everyone's tomato is someone else's potato, or something like that  ;D but I'm just saying that I believe most folks would generally say the Cali is a good if not great 2-up bike.  New one, likely even better.

http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=33883.0

[Kev m]

I was being rhetorical.  :BEER:

I'm sure many consider it great, but it was far from other benchmark touring bikes in the industry.

Though obviously many here thought that was a good thing.

[Mad Mac]

Is it just me, or is it somewhat Runesque?

California 1400


Honda Rune

[bpreynolds]

I dunno about that comparison but it is going to Ruin the competition, right?   ;D

[Kev m]

Not even remotely.

Front end, tank shapes, fenders, suspension, headlight, bar positions, motor etc all different.

The shape of the muffler is about the only real similarity.

[Chicago Mark]

     Because the passengers toes nearly always rub, hit or interfere with the riders calves when stopped, the Tonti bikes get very poor marks from me as a 2 up motorcycle. If it works for, great, enjoy. From the few side pictures that have been posted of the Cali 1400, this issue 'could' finally be resolved.
     I see very little in common with the styling of the Honda Rune and the new Guzzi California 1400. But I sure am anxious to see this new Guzzi in person.

YMMV,

Mark

[pauldaytona]

so here is the first offficial picture:

http://www.motociclismo.it/moto-guzzi-california-1400-la-prima-foto-ufficiale-moto-53193

[Kev m]

Not bad...

[Guzzi-Guy]

  ;-T. I like it

[Steph]

With the skunk seat, it's got that "don't mess with success" California Vintage look.

They should get Tony Soprano on it for their adverts!

[rocker59]

The passing light mounts are horrible.  Otherwise, it looks good.

[bad Chad]

Looks well thought out.  Actually, when weighed against previous attempts into the cruiser market, this bike is far and away supreme.   It looks better than the british Thunderbird, and on par, or close to  any H-D, and far better than the majority of big cruiser from Asia.  The wind screen looks good, maybe it will work well too! 8)   

I still think this bike may turn out to be the biggest hit in modern MG history.  Looks like the new v7 line is doing very well, to the point that sales must be up by double digits, perhaps big doubles, but I think this bike may go even bigger.

[pauldaytona]

The passing light mount looks so that the light will vibrate off after a short time. Maybe it's made better then the picture shows.

[cruzziguzzi]

Nice enough but I wonder if it can lure me away from my Calvin once I see it in person. I'm kinda thinkin' not at this point but one never can tell.

[DaddyRabbit]

I was thinking the same as Cruzzi, but if its larger it may fit my frame better.  I do love my Calvin and my list of complaints is very short. However, more leg room and longer suspension travel (anybody know?) on such a beautiful bike may just lure me away. 

I like it.

[Chicago Mark]

My first thought was maybe the spot light bracket can be rotated 180 degrees as the lights look a bit odd mounted so low. Otherwise, bring it on and bring it over in white.

Mark

[rtbickel]

Maybe its just the angle of the photo, but does the front crashbar look oddly proportioned?  Doesnt look as if it would provide much head/valve cover protection.  But otherwise its looking good.  And does that appear to be a flip out floorboard or passenger peg there in front of the saddlebag?