Norge GT 8V wet weight

[Seed]

Hello,

I am new to the forum, thinking of purchasing a 2014 Norge GT 8V (should have the roller tappets, saw that issue discussed).

Can someone tell me the "wet" weight of the Norge (with full tank of gas). Trying to get an idea how much heavier it will be than my 2003 Honda Nighthawk 750.

Thanks!

Seed

[JeffOlson]

Moto Guzzi lists the "dry" weight as 566 pounds. I believe that "dry" means ready to ride, with battery and oil and all else, but without gasoline. The Norge has a 6 gallon tank. Given that gasoline weighs approximately 6.183 pounds per gallon (it varies a bit), the wet weight should be about 603 pounds.

By the way, a 2014 will have roller tappets.

The Norge will be a good 100 pounds heavier than your bike, and you will notice it around the garage. However, you will probably be amazed at how well the Norge handles in corners and how planted it feels cruising down the highway.

[canuguzzi]

If you test ride one, make sure the tire pressures are up to snuff. Low tire pressure on a Norge will have you thinking you jumped on a pig with a saddle.

With proper tire pressures it handles well but you can't hide the extra poundage compared to the other bike. You'll notice it at low speeds, stop lights, putting it up in the stand, all those things the Norge really wasn't meant to be doing all the time. 

Try not to compare the weight too much, the two bikes are completely different. From a standpoint of handling the weight for your stature/strength it could be a challenge if you would use it for an around town bike but it was deigned for open roads and the touring side of sport riding.

Biased but I think its the best Moto Guzzi made.

[Gliderjohn]

Quote from Norge Pilot:

If you test ride one, make sure the tire pressures are up to snuff. Low tire pressure on a Norge will have you thinking you jumped on a pig with a saddle.

Some of you may think I have no "sensativity" but this is what happened to me on the way home from JN Smith's funeral. I spent the return night in Bristow. Not too long after I left in the morning the Norge would feel just a bit weird on rough pavement otherwise fine. At this point most of the roads I was on were fairly straight or just mild curves. I am running 65-75. I needed gas and stopped in Wellington, KS. Tires looked fine but I decided to check and the rear was ZERO! (Angel ST). I pumped it up to 50 pounds and rode the remaining 70 miles home okay. What I am trying to say is that I could not feel that much difference and certainly not really disconcerting running on no air. It is certainly not a "pig" with a few pounds down.

[kingoffleece]

I must be missing something here.  I was under the assumption that zero pounds per inch would be a flat tire.

[Seed]

Thank you for the responses...looks like the Norge would be approximately 100 pounds heavier than my bike (or a 20% increase).

When I get a chance to check one out, I'll post a message.

[canuguzzi]

I must be missing something here.  I was under the assumption that zero pounds per inch would be a flat tire.

No kidding.  Then pumping it up to 50? Riding on a flat tire and not really noticing it much and going 65+ to boot?

There has to be more to the story.

Taking all that as stated, then maybe he's just not sensitive to tire pressures because the Norge is. Go down a few pounds in front and you can feel it right away. It gets sluggish and pushes over abruptly at low speed.

[Gliderjohn]

Quote from King:

I must be missing something here.  I was under the assumption that zero pounds per inch would be a flat tire.

You would think but apparently with the low profile of the tire and the stiff sidewall it doesn't appear flat at all on the side stand. If I had a rider behind me plus my weight that rider probably would have seen that the tire was flat. What can I say, it is what happened.
GliderJohn

[Darren Williams]

I'm not a highly skilled, hard pushing rider, but I do like to lean a bike over and occasionally experience some serious acceleration. 

That said, when riding around easy (slow), rear tire pressure differences aren't that noticeable for me.  Front pressure I can tell moderate difference pretty easy.  When pushing a bit, the front pressure makes way more difference in handling than the rear. To experiment, everyone should play with different pressures, over same road, speeds, and temperature, a bit just to feel what is what. 

As far as the Norge goes, yes it's a top heavy, scale tipping Sport touring bike.  The weight and balance make it do what it does very well.  But each has to evaluate if they really want, and can handle, a bike that top heavy. With the type of riding I do, that weight and balance are preferred for high speed stability (especially in windy conditions) and how well the top heaviness helps it hold a line in the corners (at the expense of flickability).  Of course right now I'm primarily riding a 635 lbs. wide, tub of lard with a big "soulless" inline 4 cylinder engine, and loving it. So what do I know? 

[kingoffleece]

  I'd say your fortunate that the tire did not separate from the rim or that the sidewall did not get too badly damaged to hold air.

[Gliderjohn]

Quote from Kingoffleece:

  I'd say your fortunate that the tire did not separate from the rim or that the sidewall did not get too badly damaged to hold air.

Yes I am! I think that was probably due to mostly riding on straight roads. Maybe it went totally zero air shortly before I stopped too. Know way to know for sure. I lost two pounds of air on that last 70 mile ride to home. When the tire was dismounted it looked perfect in every respect outside of a small hole dead center of in the tread.
GliderJohn

[canuguzzi]

I'm not a highly skilled, hard pushing rider, but I do like to lean a bike over and occasionally experience some serious acceleration. 

That said, when riding around easy (slow), rear tire pressure differences aren't that noticeable for me.  Front pressure I can tell moderate difference pretty easy.  When pushing a bit, the front pressure makes way more difference in handling than the rear. To experiment, everyone should play with different pressures, over same road, speeds, and temperature, a bit just to feel what is what. 

As far as the Norge goes, yes it's a top heavy, scale tipping Sport touring bike.  The weight and balance make it do what it does very well.  But each has to evaluate if they really want, and can handle, a bike that top heavy. With the type of riding I do, that weight and balance are preferred for high speed stability (especially in windy conditions) and how well the top heaviness helps it hold a line in the corners (at the expense of flickability).  Of course right now I'm primarily riding a 635 lbs. wide, tub of lard with a big "soulless" inline 4 cylinder engine, and loving it. So what do I know?

That would be an FJR?

[Darren Williams]

That would be an FJR?

Nailed it!

[Seed]

Hello,

Thought I'd jump in again.

A few responses to this post indicate the Norge feels top heavy. A full 6 gallon gas tank seems like it would certainly contribute to that. I have read several reviews of the Norge though where they make claims that the weight of the bike is (or at least seems that it is) down low. Of course, I suspect this has to do at least to some degree with speed. Feels top heavy at slow speeds but not at cruising speeds??

I won't know what it feels like until I actually ride one. Part of the issue will be how my feet are planted at a stop. I am 5-8 with a 30" inseam. the seat height of 31.9" is exactly one inch higher than my Nighthawk (30.9"). On Guzzi's web site, under the Norge specs it indicates there is a lower seat option which reduces the seat height by 1.2 inches (down to 30.7). Yet, when you check the Norge accessories page, it shows a low seat that claims the height is 29". Anyone know which is accurate?

Thanks again!

Seed

[Cool Runnings]

Nailed it!

The Norge is a different beast than the FJR, the biggest concern may be cramped legs........

In order to cure this you may have to spend a sizeable amount modifying the seat and lowering the foot-pegs.

[Waltr]

  I know that how a bike feels is personal but I have never ever though my Norge felt top heavy.  Top heavy as I understand it is a bike that want to fall into corners.  That is not how my bike handles.  I can lean into a sweeper and it will stay there without  further attention.  I will do that with a trunk and tank bag as well.  It's not FAST handling though and it's weight can be felt in tranitions.

Of course this is my take.  The bike for me is very easy to ride and get familiar with.

[blackcat]

Seed,

I have the lowered seat on my Norge and I too have a 30" inseam. The bike is fine for me with that seat and I can flat foot it unless I have beads or sheepskin on the pad but even then it isn't bad.  In terms of the top heavy issue, yeah it can get away from me on occasion in a slow turn if I'm not paying attention, but that hardly happens anymore after 8 years of ownership. Personally I think the bike handles reasonably well in big sweepers or even tight turns but of course compared to smaller, lighter bikes there is no comparison. 

[canuguzzi]

Nailed it!

Funny thing. A few days ago I pulled to a stop and thee was a guy on an FJR already there waiting for a light.  We glanced at each other for the nod and you know, he had a grin on his face too.

Its all good.

So long as I'm not going to do a coast to coast and back, my Norge is a good ticket but for a no worries ride for long hitches, an FJR is the lick.

Not to get off track too much but are you looking at the new update hitting the market in March? Same weight but an extra gear and some nice refinements.

[Darren Williams]

Not to get off track too much but are you looking at the new update hitting the market in March? Same weight but an extra gear and some nice refinements.

Not at all. Mine is a 2015, which I got a great deal on because of the changes. IMHO the motor doesn't need a 6 speed gearbox as the torque from 3k up to 9K redline makes for a easier ride with only 5, less shifting. The only changed top gear ratio by a tiny bit and I don't need to go over 150 MPH or cruise over 120 MPH anyway. The current traction control, ride modes, and mapping is pretty good (Yamaha seems to have that nailed) and it has all the little extras I could possibly want. It is heavy but carries it's weight down low and is plenty fun in the Ozarks. Only thing that took a bit of getting used to is the seat/bike is WIDE when straddling it.

That is something I appreciated about the Breva/Norge. The seat is narrow so the seat height feels lower (think how BMW specifies it as a loop from ground, over seat, then back to ground, much more descriptive). Even with the Stelvio I had felt lower than specs. I usually kept the seat in the high position, even being only 5'-9" tall. As Guzzijohn says, "Putting two feet down is overrated", or something like that.

Back on topic, the relative high CG of the Norge actually helps it to lean into and stay stable in the corners. Only time I felt the weight was pushing it around or picking it up off the side stand on a slight down hill lean. Typical Guzzi, the handling at speed will surprise people at how good it is straight out of the box.  And I had no issues taking my CARC bikes down the interstate to get to the twisties.

[kingoffleece]

Right.  Moto GP bikes don't have a "low" CG.  They have it near the roll center and the Norge, by chance, in part due to the alternator being in the V of the  motor, meaning the Roll center and GC are closer together.  This is by design.

It's more complicated than this by far but it's the general idea.

[Huzo]

What's the difference between the roll centre and the centre of gravity?

[kingoffleece]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ9ocXniUnI

This explanation uses cars.  Stay with it until they get to the relationship of CG and Roll Center.  On bikes it was explained to me by a chassis guy who sets up Daytona 200 bikes-but the psychics are the same as the vid.

[oldbike54]

 Don't let Darren fool you , he is a highly skilled rider , so is Gliderjohn 

 Dusty

[kingoffleece]

Yes, I get that.  I know what I think I know from shop time with the chassis guys I know.
The one friend used to work at a Triumph dealer but worked with Suzuki at the Daytona 200 for years-still does.  I'd stand around and listen to them chat, modify, bend, twist, and lots of other things.  I'd ask lots of questions.  The real short story was that a low CG was not the be all end all for the chassis set up on the race bike.

I don't claim to be a set-up guy but spending plenty of time with those guys, some of whom have worked on winning bikes, I do know what I heard.

There is also a section in Kevin Camarons book on chassis design and set-up.

I'm not trying to take anybody on here-it's WAY too tough of a crowd!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Gliderjohn]

Quote from old bike 54:

Don't let Darren fool you , he is a highly skilled rider , so is Gliderjohn

Thank you Dusty. But to put this in perspective the only way Dusty and Rocker observed my skill or lack of it was in their rearview mirrors with lowriyder pushing against my rear fender. 
GliderJohn

[JeffOlson]

Seed, a couple more thoughts:

Weight: Yes, the Norge is heavier than your current bike, but that weight is an advantage out on the highway. As a result of its heft, the Norge is relatively stable. However, it is not a behemoth, and it is surprisingly nimble. Also, it is not so much top-heavy as it is simply heavy. Having said that, I heave mine around the farm yard daily. We do not have a garage or even any concrete. I back it 20 feet into a spot under an overhang, with my hands on a handlebar and a grab handle, over bumpy gravel and dirt.

Height: My inseam is also about 30 inches. With boots on, I can flat-foot the Norge at a stop light. My own considerable heft helps compress the suspension and thereby lower the bike, and the front of the stock saddle is narrow, making it easier to reach the ground. Most of the time, however, I keep my right foot on the rear brake pedal while at a stop, with only my left foot down. The Norge is not so heavy or top-heavy that this is hard to do. On the contrary, it is quite easy to balance it (unless my wife is on it with me; then I always put both feet down).

[Huzo]

Dusting off some old physics lectures reminds me that weight is mass x gravity and always acts straight down in a corner or anywhere else, centrifugal force acts equal and opposite to centripetal force and acts horizontally outward, say to the right in a left handler, the two vectors resolve to produce a resultant force straight through the contact patch into the road. The "top heaviness" of your Norge like all bikes will disappear once in motion, it doesn't matter how good of a rider or otherwise that you are, these are the basic forces at play, Issac Newton said so and he doesn't ride a Guzzi. You could strap a bag of cement to the expensive  tank of your Norge and go for a ride and you won't feel any difference, in fact the inertia will aid the stability, just won't go or stop as well, (inertia again)

[canuguzzi]

Don't forget the laws regarding inertia.

An object at rest stays at rest and an object in motion stays in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Getting that concrete bagged Norge to heel over might take more effort. The suspension now supporting all that additional weight due to the centrifugal force will collapse faster and harder. The tires, now loaded with more weight will react differently.

You'll notice that.

Forget all that though, what's going to grab you in the butt pad is the lower MPG!

[frans belgium]

The Norge is not a lightweight and is has a pretty high CG.  But it has excellent balance and is extremely stable, both in straight and cornering.  Great wind protection, comfortable seat,  sufficient suspension and turbine-like motor, make it a great touring bike.  Extremely comfy for passenger as well, 500 mile rides are no  pain, we did a 800 mile ride a few years ago.
And it's not the Bmw that every one else has.  With it's slender lines, it is by far the most attractive tourer around. The white one is the fastest 
Contra: sharp knee angle, which can bother some riders.  (Higher the seat or lower the pegs in that case).
Ride one and draw your own conclusions. Good luck!

[kingoffleece]

The basic motorcycle that is currently the Norge 8V GT has, in its combined models, been the most popular bike in our 21 year history. Even though it’s only been with us for 8 of our 21 years, it’s been the choice of 22% of our new Guzzi purchasers. That’s impressive, and so is the bike. We first saw it as the Breva 1100. Then it came to us as a sport-tourer with a larger engine, saddlebags, and fairing as the Norge 1200. That bike morphed into the 1200 Sport as a slimmer, sportier variant. And now we have an update of the original Norge with the 8-valve engine and revised brakes, ergonomics, fairing, suspension, cooling, & fuel management.


But the essential bike remains the same. Guzzi conceived it as the return of the V7 Special, an early V-twin renown for unspecialized versatility but with great competence. True to form, our modern version has proven very comfortable – you don’t see many custom seats on them – with ergonomics that have people from the low 5-foot range to well over 6 feet saying, “It feels like it was meant for me.”


Some of the features are easily apparent: the chrome-moly steel perimeter frame, thick 45mm adjustable forks, anti-lock 4-piston Brembo calipers gripping 320mm stainless discs, heated grips, adjustable windscreen, quadpolyelipsoidal halogen headlights, damping- & preload-adjustable single-shock rear suspension with linkage, and color-matched keyed-alike quick-detach saddlebags.


But other engineering is subtle. For instance, mounting the high-output alternator up between the cylinders allows the mass of the engine to be located closer to the front wheel for the better handling of forward weight bias. And here’s a novel idea adapted from Aprilia’s world champion sport bikes: the crankshaft’s center line is about 1¼” above the transmission’s to position the engine’s weight higher. Higher? I’ll bet we all thought low center of gravity was preferred! But for a motorcycle at road speed, having the engine mass closer to the roll center (think like an airplane) means that it takes less leverage (strength) to lift the bottom of the engine to the (as an example) right side in order to lower the top of the bike into a left turn.


The result is a big roomy bike that’s quite light steering. Remarkable!




Ciao,



Dave Richardson


From Moto International web site-FYI