*California 1400 Merged Threadfest*

[Kev m]

^^^  Nice first look.  The comments about fuel economy and range are peculiar, though.

First, the fuel capacity is 5.55 US gals., not 4.5 gals.  However, the range the author quoted for a 30 mpg consumption rate is correct for 5.55 gals.  Strange.

More strange is that 30 mpg figure.  That is terrible gas mileage.  Maybe the engine was very tight; Guzzis have a notoriously long break-in period, over which fuel consumption usually improves.  Maybe the author just got his math wrong.

Moto Guzzi is quoting a 15% fuel economy improvement over the 1200 8V engine.  Is anybody seeing 30 mpg or less from their 8V Stelvios or Norges?  A 15% improvement in fuel economy should yield a consumption rate of around 45 mpg and a 250-mile range.

Well, as you know I was already skeptical about their claims based on the general inaccuracy of many of their (and other manufacturer) claims. That said I still wonder what Guzzi claims as the mpg for a Norge or Stelvio anyway?

And it's entirely possible this new bike does show a 15%    increase under some ridiculous, not realistic condition, like running 40 mph in 5th for hours at a time or some similar silliness.

Sheep, dry weights (lie weights) are like crankshaft hp, they are a way to compare apples to apples with what most other manufacturers provide. But that doesn't mean the figure given by Guzzi is incorrect. It's still a good starting point to understand the mass of the bike in question.

[Sheepdog]

You weighed your CalVin, dry?  The reason why I'm questioning this is because "dry" means: no fuel in the tank or anywhere in the system; no trace of oil anywhere in the bike -- engine, transmission, or driveline; no brake fluid anywhere in the system; no battery installed; no air in the tires; and no accessories, factory or otherwise.  Add all of those things to the bike, and it will easily increase the observed weight by more than 50 lbs.

I would say that for the CalVin, dry weight 580 lbs / wet weight 640 lbs, is about right.  Given the added size and extra equipment of the nuovo California, a 100 lb increase in weight is about what I'd expect (although I was hoping for maybe 30 or 40 lbs less).

I did not weigh my Vintage, but Cycle World did in their October, 2008 issue.  They listed dry weight at 629 lbs.  Even if their weighing only excluded fuel, the other fluids can only tip the scales at around 6 lbs, for a total delta between dry and wet of about 36 lbs (my understanding of "dry weight" includes a battery without acid...if it doesn't include the battery, it is a misleading and untrue metric).  On top of everything else, the Vintage "feels" like it weighs well over 600 lbs.  I'm guessing mine weighs at least 665 lbs wet...more with the topcase.  Don't get me wrong; the Vintage is still a lightweight within the "Bagger" genre (it was the lightest in the 8 bike CW comparo by 117 to 237 lbs) and I really love it.  However, Guzzi's published dry weight is indeed "fantasy".

[Kev m]

How would Cycle World weigh a dry bike?

They are not given crated bikes, they ride their bikes to and from the press fleet.

They're certainly not going to empty the fluids to weigh it.

Every magazine I've ever read either have the manufacturer provided dry weight OR their own measured wet weight.

[Sheepdog]

As I stated above, CW probably considers "dry" to mean "fuel tank empty".  Just the same, non-gasoline fluids can only account for about six lbs and five gallons of fuel is just a little over 30 lbs...

OTOH, I'd be delighted to be wrong.

[Pfaff!]

no air in the tires...

 :bow

[youcanrunnaked]

Guzzi's published dry weight is indeed "fantasy".

No, it's not.

Motorcycle manufacturers are fortunately moving away from quoting "dry" weights, but in the past, manufacturer's quoted dry weights have been without the battery installed.  Adding all fluids, a battery, and air in the tires, will typically result in a "ready-to-ride" weight of around 50 - 70 lbs greater than the factory dry weight; more for some larger bikes -- particularly those that are water-cooled.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_testing_and_measurement

By industry standards, the CalVin's quoted dry weight of 263 kg (580 lbs.) is about right.  Cycle World may have quoted a different dry weight, but that's probably because Cycle World has given dry weight a different definition from that given by the manufacturer.  (It's likely that what CW calls dry weight is the weight as delivered, but without fuel.)

Either version of dry weight may be considered a "fantasy" in that you can't start the bike up and ride it in that condition, but that's not the point.  The ready-to-ride weight of the CalVin is around 640 lbs. -- pretty close to 580 lbs. plus what 5.02 US gal. of fuel (@ 6.073 lbs./gal = 30.50 lbs.), 3 liters of motor oil and 1 liter of gear oil (8.0 lbs), and a filled battery (17.0 lbs.) weigh.

[youcanrunnaked]

And in the heads, Hydraulic Tappet Rollers!!!! OH MY an 8V Hydro motor.  How many fixes will this one need?

Wait.  The roller tappets are hyraulic? I thought they were going to be mechanical.  So, no valve adjustments?  A bold move, indeed.

[bpreynolds]

Ash is a good guy and I enjoy his write ups.  He's usually kind and favorable to Guzzis but he is a British journo who will display a bias for British bikes.  The mpg numbers are about what I expected so no big surprise for me in that area.

[Vasco DG]

Looking at the parts manual there are still adjusters on the rockers. One assumes it will be a 'Set and Forget' system. I just hope that the people who are working on them will in fact read the bloody book before embarking down the track of screwing things up.

I haven't had a chance to look at the manual yet. There are some differences between what's on the Servicemotoguzzi site in the US and here and I haven't checked to see if its up on ours yet.

Pete

[Vasco DG]

This link should work if people want a squizz at the handbook.

http://www.servicemotoguzzi.com/public/lumGuzzi/Moto%20Guzzi%20California%201400/B063711%20Moto%20Guzzi%20California%201400%20ES-EN.pdf

Pete

[Kev m]

If those mpg numbers are accurate this bike will have a range as short as the Jackal which is a little disappointing. I also don't see a good reason for a cruiser or touring bike to deliver worse fuel mileage than a car that is more than double the weight.

That said, hydraulic lifters are a huge plus for this bike.

More and more, I like this bike and see some real reasons why I might chose it over a Road King in the future.

I'll be watching it the next year or two as I enjoy my imminently to be delivered V7.

[Vasco DG]

Steve? Looking at the service schedule in the online manual it sez valve clearance adjust every 10,000km?

Pete

[Kev m]

Steve? Looking at the service schedule in the online manual it sez valve clearance adjust every 10,000km?

Pete

Sooo which is the mistake?

Could be the maintenance schedule...or could be the listing calling em hydraulic....

I'm hoping it's the former.

[Vasco DG]

I'm downloading the manual PDF at the moment Kev. I'm sure as soon as Steve and I or anyone else Cantrell up we'll give what will hopefully be he or react and definitive answer.

Pete

[guzzisteve]

The only thing I can get is the user man, workshop is only online here is US, and no parts info on US site. 
Funny thing is when you hit the label for valve adjustment, you get a blank page on redirection.
Looking at the pics of the rockers, it has the 3mm w/locknut like 8V Norge.  It does state they are hydraulic in the assy of them (lifters).

Just had a long day.

[Vasco DG]

All the workshop stuff is subject to copyright so I can't link it up here but Steve should be able to look at it (Nudge, Wink,) if it isn't available to him. As he's discovered though valve clearance adjustment instructions lead to a blank page. Yes, the service schedule says Adjust every 10,000. Then the manual talks about hydraulic roller tappets implying non adjustability but the also  the rockers have lash adjusters.

???

I'll bug Daniel tomorrow...... ;D

Pete

[moltoguzzi]

:bow

Italian air is very heavy, almost triple the weight of American air which varies slightly by state, Texas being the lightest.

[pauldaytona]

The workshop manual doesn't look complete. We've seen in the past another time that the servicemanual got a lot more pages after a time. I see on page 245 a link to "Checking the valve clearance" leads to nowhere.  I can't find how much the play should be. Also like in the past lot of pictures from old models. You see, the head has two sparkplug holes, when I see one, it's an old picture. Not any harm, maybe, but you can never be shure that the pictures are right.

[bpreynolds]

Longer and, I think, more expansive and flattering, review by Ash on his own site.  Lists valve service intervals at 6k miles?  Anyhow.  http://ashonbikes.com/content/moto-guzzi-california-1400-touring

[john fish]

http://www.performancemag.it/tecnica-dentro-al-progetto-california/

[Vasco DG]

I get to ride it next week. Nyah-Nyah!! ~; :BEER: :P

Pete

[Vasco DG]

As have all the late model single platers. I haven't X-referenced the part #'s but I wasn't aware the clutch had changed. Quite happy to be wrong.

Pete

[Kev m]

OK, I'm in front of my computer now and have my spreadsheets and magazines etc handy.

As for the weight, Guzzi's claim of a 580 lb dry weight on my Vintage was pure fantasy.  It was off by over fifty lbs.   As has been suggested before, I guess we'll just have to wait to get some verifiable facts.

In my spreadsheets I've got a wet weight for the Cal-Vin of 616 lbs. which is a reasonable (and expected) 36 lbs more than the dry.

Similarly Guzzi claimed a dry weight of 553 lbs for the Black Eagle and MCN showed a wet of 589 lbs, which is again 36 lbs.

I don't see the reason for the angst over Guzzi's specs.

Now that said, they've changed to reporting Curb Weight on some of the newer models like this Cal 1400, so we'll have to see once someone like MCN gets their hands on it if the weights match up like you say, but I'm optimistic.

[LowRyter]

I get to ride it next week. Nyah-Nyah!! ~; :BEER: :P

Pete

we expect a comprehensive and unbiased report.  Good enough so half the board will buy you a beer and the rest will lynch ya!

 :BEER: :BEER: :BEER:
 ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~; ~;



 :beat_horse

[Mark West]

I thought the new Cal was supposed to be designed for the US market. Shouldn't it be coming here first?

[Vasco DG]

I think that the factory tends to release new models, especially if there are substantial changes, in Europe and the smaller markets first. That way if there are teething problems they can try and sort them out before the machine is released in the generally much more demanding American market. Its not a theory that always pans out, look at the tappet failure fiasco on the earlier 8V's. hopefully Guzzi have learnt their lesson and will make a greater effort to ensure their products are serviced correctly to prevent the same thing happening again.

Pete.

[Moto]

Cycle World just corrected the weight from 843 to 743 pounds:

Andrew Bornhop • an hour ago −
Moto, the Guzzi weight has been corrected. Thanks.

[Murray]

I thought the new Cal was supposed to be designed for the US market. Shouldn't it be coming here first?

What Pete said plus its summer here and there is no recession, something about making hay while the sun shines.

[italianmotor]

Just got back from testing the new California in France. It's big! It handles! More pics here: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.484648414913984.112577.124570650921764&type=1&l=beae88d602

[Gary]

Motorcycle Daily first ride:

http://www.motorcycledaily.com/2012/11/md-first-ride-2013-moto-guzzi-california-1400/