v7 lack of power, why?

[guzzipete]

I said it before and I'll say it again.... I would bet 90% or more of the motorcycling population can't use all the power the Ninja 250 puts out but insist on buying motorcycles well over a 100 HP.

+1

I think that HP ratings are more for bragging rites than anything else. That's why I purchase condoms in the magnum size. I know I will never use all of it, but I can bring them out to impress my friends.

[Vasco DG]

No, it doesn't run out of steam at 60 and no I don't wish for more, which is why I sold the Guzzi big blocks, and the Buell, and shun the M696 in the fleet.

I've been on a 180 rwhp bike and wished I was on something like a V7, but I'm rarely ever on a V7 wishing the opposite.

The ONLY exception to that is IF my riding was going to be 80+ ALL DAY, yes, I'd probably be more comfortable on a Norge or B11... BUT that's not the type of riding I prefer to do all day.

I should add I rode a little 120+ mile loop yesterday which included the NJ MGNOC lunch. That loop also included two higway stints of about a dozen miles each and the V7 had no problem with 80+ (I'm not going to say how much plus but at one point it was not insignificant)..

I doubt from your description that the KLR would have kept up.

And that is the crux of the matter. If I wasn't so fond of my Mana I'd probably have a V7-II Stone as my 'Touring' bike. Over here when Jude and I go touring we try to avoid freeways and I certainly am not going to be going into full-on loony mode with Jude on the back so why would I need a powerful bike?

I toured all over Europe in the late seventies on a T500 Triumph, sometimes two up. That would of had way less get-up-and-go than a V7 Guzzi but I didn't have an unpleasant time.

Even if I do have to do long Freeway hauling in Oz the freeway limit is 110kph and a V7 will do that all day without blinking but once you are on the smaller byways, apart from the Hay Plains or the long, straight roads in the outback, a V7 is fine.

The reason why you can't get a V7 to perform like another, modern, 750 has been discussed ad nauseam if people can't grasp the simple physics governing it's limitations there is no point in trying to explain.

Pete

[erik_w]

http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html

ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...

therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...

[lucky phil]

I said it before and I'll say it again.... I would bet 90% or more of the motorcycling population can't use all the power the Ninja 250 puts out but insist on buying motorcycles well over a 100 HP.

Oh well to each their own

Like most things its not about what you need but what you want. 100HP and 160kg is about my yardstick for a road bike, with the emphasis on the weight.

Ciao

[sign216]

If Guzzi hadn't made V7's (the modern ones with fuel injection), I would still be riding a BMW airhead.  The Guzzi V7 is the closest thing I can find in a modern bike to compare to an airhead and I REALLY liked airheads.

And...the Heron head simplifies the engine.  A more complicated design produces more power, but BMW has taken it too far.  You can't even work on your own modern BMW cycle now.  Thankfully, Guzzi is a little "backward." 

Less is more.

[tiger_one]

Here's a link to an article about the Heron head...the good and bad:
http://www.italian.sakura.ne.jp/bad_toys/heronhead/


Peter Y.

Great link, with pictures even I can understand.

[Perazzimx14]

http://guzzipower.com/V65dyno3.html

ed seems to have gotten a v65 to above 50 rwhp ...

therefore a v7 should be able to do the same at least, just given the right modifications. given the displacement advantage it should require less work to get there ...

Ed also doesn't provide you a two year unlimited mileage warranty, doesn't have to meet emission/noise standards, doesn't have to use pump gas, doesn't have to jet/map the fueling to work in a variaty of elevations/temperatures or weather conditions, doesn't have to meet a price point and on and on.

Would you be willing to buy a new bike then have Ed build you a race engine that produces 60+ HP but now you have no warranty, cannot get it inspected due to emission/noise levels, runs on $7 gallon race gas, fueling works in a small geographic location and hand him a blank check to so?



 

[Phil Ammendolia]

I do understand perfectly well that the v7 is a very old design that goes back, well not quite, to the original v7 of 1968(?). That why I was comparing the specs to the older bikes...

I also understand that HP is not all there is to it, and that if you try to pull a truck using a UJM with 200 HP it would simply disintegrate while a Harley with a HP of 45 would pull the truck all day. But I do think it is a relevant measure to guage an engines performance.

Can somebody point me to a thread regarding a succesfully tuned v7?

The bike I ride today has a claimed hp of 36, so I am not a stickler for specs, this is more out of curiosity!

Hi Erik,

In the late '60's and early 70's, manufacturers took a LOT of liberties with the truth. Dynos were few and far between. As mentioned earlier, many measured HP at the crank, where now it's more common to measure at the brake (called Brake Horsepower or BHP). Still, I'd doubt that early V7 put 70 HP out anywhere other than the brochure. Likely, it produced a fair bit less power and torque than a newer model. Even with the new model being a "retro classic" with basic brakes and suspension, those new components, as lacking as they may be, are MUCH better than what was available in 1970.

Here is a thread from a year or so ago that offers a few clues: http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=70895.0

Check out Guzzipower.com. He's said to have pulled 50 HP out of a V7.

Hope that answers your questions.

FYI, though I know this wasn't a part of what you're asking, I agree with the comments that one would be better off addressing suspension on these things before power. Those who say hop-ups on a V7 are a waste are correct, if it isn't what they want. If it's the bike that would make you happy, go for it.

[Kev m]

Those who say hop-ups on a V7 are a waste are correct, if it isn't what they want. If it's the bike that would make you happy, go for it.

THIS...

OP - if you REALLY want to hop up a V7, talk to Ed at GuzziPower.

Be prepared to spend.

[malik]

Even if I do have to do long Freeway hauling in Oz the freeway limit is 110kph and a V7 will do that all day without blinking but once you are on the smaller byways, apart from the Hay Plains or the long, straight roads in the outback, a V7 is fine.

Pete

I'm about to be reminded how well the V7 (the Special this time), does the long, straight roads - heading to Broken Hill on Thursday. Will let you know. Looks like we missed the tornado that hit Dubbo yesterday.

Mal

[father guzzi obrian]

Back in the early 70's, I had a Honda 350 CL with the side pipes.  It would wheelie with a bit of clutch and flat out on the 91 freeway in my best Rollie Free pose, it would pull 100 mph.  I rode that bike all over California, it had enough power for me back then, and with the tires of the 70's, you would not have wanted more. I paid my friend $50 for it as it had died in his garage, I gave him an extra $25 when it started with a new battery. I beat it like a red headed step child for 4 years and never saw a change in performance. I pull a trailer with a surfboard on in, and rode it to Nor Cal from Orange County.  Finally sold it for $325. Perhaps the best bike I ever had. My maintenance costs. After I filed all the way through the points, I had to put new points on, also, the pot metal shift lever snapped off in big bear, used vice grips for a month then got a shift lever. That was the parts I added in 4 years other than maintenance...  My eldo was much the same, if only it had the drum brakes the Honda had

[Gliderjohn]

I will reinforce about "claimed HP" back in the day. As someone stated the T-3 stats claimed 68 HP. Considering drivetrain loss, should net around the upper 50s, right?

My T-3 motor has the 1,000cc kit, V-7 Sport cam, 36mm round slides, heads ported, HD valve springs. I did have it dyno measured and it came out to a bit over 56 HP and 53 lbs of torque. So I would say the brochure HP was very optimistic.


GliderJohn

[pyoungbl]

Can somebody point me to a thread regarding a succesfully tuned v7?

If you are just looking for a succesfully tuned V7, I have it.  My '13 has been dyno tuned and re-flashed.  The bike runs great.  This took the RWHP from 39.57 to......(drum beat)...41.86.  Torque from 39.26 to 39.04.  In other words, not a significant change on either hp or torque.  If you change the air intake you'll probably see the numbers go down.  I have posted the actual dyno graph on earlier threads so these are not seat of the pants figures.  The real benefit of all this is just an air/fuel ratio that is more consistent across the rev range and a bike that seems to run smoother.  It's still limited by the Heron head.

Peter Y.

[BRIO]

No, it doesn't run out of steam at 60 and no I don't wish for more, which is why I sold the Guzzi big blocks, and the Buell, and shun the M696 in the fleet.

I've been on a 180 rwhp bike and wished I was on something like a V7, but I'm rarely ever on a V7 wishing the opposite.

The ONLY exception to that is IF my riding was going to be 80+ ALL DAY, yes, I'd probably be more comfortable on a Norge or B11... BUT that's not the type of riding I prefer to do all day.

I should add I rode a little 120+ mile loop yesterday which included the NJ MGNOC lunch. That loop also included two higway stints of about a dozen miles each and the V7 had no problem with 80+ (I'm not going to say how much plus but at one point it was not insignificant)..

I doubt from your description that the KLR would have kept up.

Maybe I should rephrase. The KLR does not accelerate judiciously above 60. It will indicate 95-100 but above 80 it's a slow crawl. It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration. The Norge on the other hand will pull like a freight train above 80. The point wasn't to knock your V7. I'm fantasizing about owning a v7 sport myself. I was explaining the difference between torque and HP and where you might be left wanting for more horsepower. Around town driving and country roads don't require a lot of ponies. At higher speeds, total energy output (HP) becomes important as drag increases. Finally, I don't think anyone "needs" more that 40-50HP. I'm in no way insinuating that your V7 is inadequate. It's just not an interstate locomotive partly because of the lack of horsepower.

This discussion reminds me of my Audiophile days. The Brit-fi guys would claim that most people don't need more than 25w and that wattage was irrelevant anyway. Granted, their little Naim amps punched above their weight and their speakers were sensitive. However when people started putting them in American sized living rooms they would run out of steam if they had to fill said room with Carl Orff's O'fortuna which by the way is awesome interstate driving music;)

[oldbike54]

Like most things its not about what you need but what you want. 100HP and 160kg is about my yardstick for a road bike, with the emphasis on the weight.

Ciao

  352 LBS , are you sure ?

  Dusty

[Kev m]

FOR THE READER'S DIGEST VERSION - just READ THE BOLD

I was explaining the difference between torque and HP and where you might be left wanting for more horsepower. Around town driving and country roads don't require a lot of ponies. At higher speeds, total energy output (HP) becomes important as drag increases. Finally, I don't think anyone "needs" more that 40-50HP. I'm in no way insinuating that your V7 is inadequate. It's just not an interstate locomotive partly because of the lack of horsepower.

Ya know, if you'd put this in your post first, I'd probably not bothered to write my reply below lol because the last sentence says it all. My reply should just be "YEAh, I get that, no duh". or something to that effect.

I'm not arguing against that in any way, shape, or form.

I was explaining that I don't generally NEED OR WANT AN INTERSTATE locomotive.


I'll add that another reason the V7 isn't one is because of the diminutive size it gets blown around easier than a B11, Norge, even Sportster.

Now, that said, I already wrote all this crap, I might as well post it cause I'm a bit of spec geek:

Maybe I should rephrase. The KLR does not accelerate judiciously above 60. It will indicate 95-100 but above 80 it's a slow crawl. It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration. The Norge on the other hand will pull like a freight train above 80. The point wasn't to knock your V7.

To be clear, it's all good. I'm not taking any offense or even hearing any insinuations of inadequacy of my bikes lol.

I wonder if you might be missing the hp and torque differences between the V7 and KLR (only 8% more hp but 28% more torque), so I suspect the V7 has a bit more punch. A slightly quicker 1/4 mile confirms that, but it's an rch, so I'm sure they're overall more similar than dis-similar.

That said, if I'm already doing 65-70, I do downshift one gear if I want a quick pass on the highway.

Reminder of the data

V7 444# wet, 39 rwhp (MCN, I've seen 41 by Motorcyclist) / 41 ft. lbs.
KLR 433# wet, 36 rwhp (MCN) / 32 ft. lbs.

Now, about this:

It will still leave a HD sportster in the dust during initial acceleration.

Uh, no, no it won't (unless you're talking the 883, then unless it's a Stage I that might be true)

KLR - 0-60 5.88 seconds, 1/4 14.40
Sportys - 0-60 3.99-5.32 seconds, 1/4 12.25-13.69

And we should remember that Sportys (like all Harleys) are purposely strangled when the leave the factory. Moreso than any other brand I've seen, opening them up with an air cleaner, pipes, and tune, brings significant gains (10-20%).

But none of this really matters. I think we're just talking two different ways around a square. Do you want to get there on the highway, or do you want to get there via backroads. I have no problem droning highways if I have to, but that's literally my last choice to get anywhere on a cycle cause it's not as much fun and misses the point FOR ME.

And I've droned highways clear across this country from coast-to-coast when I HAD TO. I just don't like to HAVE TO.

Again, I had a B11, an R1100, a 100 rwhp Buell etc. I've had access to demos, press bikes, etc. for weeks at a time.

I've got 10's of thousands of miles on bikes that fight a couple of divisions above the V7 and hundreds of thousands of miles on bikes that still punch above the V7.

Hell, if I want to feel the difference between HP and Torque I just have to hop on the M696

M696 - 408# wet, 68 hp / 44 ft. lbs. (<---torque not the MCN figure of 30 ft. lbs. which doesn't agree with most dyno sheets).

But again, I know which bike I'm going to choose 90% of the time.

And IF I need to do hours on the highway, my Sportster is probably best suited of the current fleet. Yeah, it's slower than my B11, but it's not significant, and I prefer the overall riding position/comfort/amenities of the Sporty (not to mention it won't try to cook me on hot days).

B11 - 562# wet, 75 rwhp (FBF Dyno before Guzzitech reflash) / 58 ft. lbs.
1200Lr - ~585# wet, ~64 hp / 70 ft. lbs.

The 1200Lr is a tad slower than the B11 and probably geared slightly lower, but it does the job nicely solo or 2-up.

Actually the more I think about this, my problems with the B11 were NOT that I didn't like the chassis or the power, it came down almost exclusively to the ergonomics/riding position and the amount of heat it put off to the rider in hot weather. Plus I never really fell in love with the cosmetics. IF IT HAD LOOKED MORE LIKE MY V7, with similar ergos, had a metal tank, and didn't give off that heat, I might still have it.


Then again, it did tempt me to be riding faster and faster on the highway, which is something I don't need.

Ok, not sure my point anymore...maybe it's just that the V7 is just fine the way it is for me.

I get the people who want more power in something like that, actually I think they really screwed up not making the Racer a 4V head, maybe slightly bigger displacement, dual disc version of the V7... but I'm still not sure I would have chosen it for MYSELF. And it's a moot point, because they DIDN'T.

Oh, I should add one more thing I LOVE about my V7 - it regularly gets 50-55 mpg, while that B11 used to get more like 40-45.

[Penderic]

Too much my brain hurts!

Time to take a break and go for a little ride, guys!

 

[stick]

However, if it's a unique and enjoyable riding experience you're after, on great looking, great sounding, lightweight machine, the test ride might just lead to a new Guzzi in the garage.  Go ride one!

I had some extra time a few weeks back , and tried a V70II.  I was skeptical about the 49 hp.  And I thought that it was going to be geared very short (high rev's on the expressway).  But it was a head-turner.  Plenty of torque available to have loads of fun, and geared much taller than I had assumed. 

You really should make your way to a dealer and take one for a test drive.

On another note, a test drive on the new Ducati Scrambler was an eye-opener also!

[oldbike54]

Too much my brain hurts!

Time to take a break and go for a little ride, guys!

 

 Awww , those guys are about the cutest thing ever .

  Dusty

[Penderic]

And a lot cheaper to feed, move around and clean up after too!

[oldbike54]

And a lot cheaper to feed, move around and clean up after too!

 Unless one turns them into a house pet 

 Dusty

[Toecutter]

I've ridden old 70s Hondas pretty much my whole life (with a couple of exceptions), and now ride a V7 Special.

I've ridden 6 hours straight with my wife on the back at 140-145 km/h.

I've had it up to an indicated 185.

After 6500 km, the seat is comfy and the suspension nice and compliant... corners beautifully.

Plenty of passing power. Accelerates nicely, and is an all around pleasure to ride.

If you want to come flying into corners at top speed, jam on the brakes and dive into the apex... knock yourself out, but why do you want to convert an old school tourer into that? There's plenty of those out there.

[sign216]

Back in the early 70's, I had a Honda 350 CL with the side pipes.  It would wheelie with a bit of clutch and flat out on the 91 freeway in my best Rollie Free pose, it would pull 100 mph.

I remember when I was young, riding small bikes, looking at a Honda 350 and thinking "Wow, that's a real bike.  It must have some real speed."

God, how things have changed.  I went to a Guzzi dealer a few years ago in Worcester, Ma, and they were selling Breva 750s as beginner bikes.  Man, in my day a 750 was a big bike.  It was all the power you ever needed.

Hey, Pirsig (Zen and ...) rode 1/2 way across the country on a Honda 305. 

And he did it two up with camping gear, bitches.

[bpreynolds]

I just got my V7 Stone last week.  Have you seen it yet?




I'm sorry, was there some discussion here about horsepower?   

[Jim C]

Hey, BP,

You better get those stickers off the tank and fender, or you're
going to spend a long time trying to take them off. The longer
they're on, the more the glue sets.

I spent at least 2 hours getting those blasted stickers off my
2009 V7 Classic (now gone).

My V7 II Stone will be here next Monday or Tuesday. I can
hardly wait. I'm like a kid at Christmas. (I have a red one).

Jim

[bpreynolds]

Hey, BP,

You better get those stickers off the tank and fender, or you're
going to spend a long time trying to take them off. The longer
they're on, the more the glue sets.

I spent at least 2 hours getting those blasted stickers off my
2009 V7 Classic (now gone).

My V7 II Stone will be here next Monday or Tuesday. I can
hardly wait. I'm like a kid at Christmas. (I have a red one).

Jim

Hah!  After doing a small bit of research it seemed like guys had some of the best luck using a steamer so out ours came.  Yup.  All gone now (pic taken last week) and took about 20 minutes tops for all of them - four or five, I think.  Even took the ones off the shocks.   

Congrats on the bike.  Welcome  to Kidville.

[oldbike54]

 Several years back there was an article about a HD RK Evolution series . The owner , a famous journo , asked his HD mechanic buddy about modding the engine . The mechanic told him to quit worrying about the lack of HP and just ride the thing , if the engineers had intended for it to be a hot rod , they would have built a hot rod 

 Dusty

[Kev m]

Several years back there was an article about a HD RK Evolution series . The owner , a famous journo , asked his HD mechanic buddy about modding the engine . The mechanic told him to quit worrying about the lack of HP and just ride the thing , if the engineers had intended for it to be a hot rod , they would have built a hot rod 

 Dusty

HD's respond very nicely to mild uncorking. And stock or in that mild Stage I trim they are very reliable.

The easiest way to make them UBER unreliable is to start hot rodding them!!!

[oldbike54]

HD's respond very nicely to mild uncorking. And stock or in that mild Stage I trim they are very reliable.

The easiest way to make them UBER unreliable is to start hot rodding them!!!

                                                                              UBER

    :l

 Sorry , that German word always makes me laugh .

  Dusty

[Chuck in Indiana]

I just got my V7 Stone last week.  Have you seen it yet?




I'm sorry, was there some discussion here about horsepower?   

Love that color. Nice looking bike..