Small Block Guys - Why?

[Kev m]

Great input so far guys - thanks so much. You guys are giving me some things to think about.

So at least some of you would agree that it seems that smaller displacement bikes are enjoying some popularity, if only judging from an expansion of offerings, yes?

I actually think an aging riding population is an interesting thought and I find it hard to counter the logic. Even if the riding population is largely staying in shape age will still have physical effects some of which can't be ignored based on will alone.

The CDC size figures are interesting - though that "growth" has been since the 60's and the cubic inch displacement explosion seems more like only since the 90s or so in my mind.

Of course the point that in general displacements will grow and not shrink is true. Though I get your point RK that the smallblock has indeed grown in engine size, it's still considered "small" by today's mega-CC standards and heck, it's still the smallest product Guzzi sells so I'd argue it still fits the bill. Not to mention I think we've seen for sure that the smallblock is enjoying something of a renaissance in sales success for Guzzi.

 

[wildebube]

What they said, Kev.

The whole idea of riding is to have fun. For me the V7 is the package - goes everywhere, does everything, and in style. The shorter wheelbase and the lighter weight make it more chuckable in the twisties. It tours comfortably and is easy enough to work on. Every now & again I toy with the idea of another big block, but it never seems to get further than that. The 1100 Sport has a more comfortable riding position, but it's not as much fun in the tight twisties and the occasions when I actually used the available power were few. So when it came to the crunch - a big block or another V7, it was for a no-brainer.

On the other hand, the 500 Bullet is like riding a toy after the V7 - even more chuckable & shines on country roads. There's nothing like riding a thumping single through the forest - dirt or bitumen. The downside (?) of the Enfield is my reluctance to use it much on motorways - so just a little less flexible. But it is fun.

Mal

That pretty much sums up my feelings as well.  But instead of the Enfield, I'm giving some serious thought to a Honda Grom.

[fotoguzzi]

point of view on the Grom.. I'm not connected to these guys..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsuGnVnoL-0

[Tennmoto]

It's about accessibility for leasure time too. I'm more likely to jump on a small bike after work to ride the back roads for 30 minutes and return with a smile. Small bikes are fun and no worries about pushing or pulling it around. There has been an escalation in weight and power to market bikes and I think the manufacturers have realized we want small and retro.

[tasdisr]

When I bought my 2016 V7 it was my first bike in around 20 years, my last being an HD Low Rider Custom. I had certain things I was looking for in a bike. I wanted something in the under 1000cc range with ABS and of course in a certain price range. I was pretty much open to just about anything.

After looking at just about all the major brands I decided I did not want a cruiser style bike either and was about to seriously consider a Triumph Street Twin. On the way home I decided to stop at the Moto Guzzi dealer and started considering the V7. After a test ride I was sold. Nice size, plenty of power for me and a decent weight. Plus it looks good, sounds good and there are enough options out there to improve the handling if necassary.

At 64 I did not want to deal with a 700 pound bike again.

[Andy1]

A 750 used to be a big bike.  Now it is considered as being small and low powered. By comparison with the current big bikes it is but is a v7 any smaller, lighter or lower powered than say a 750 Triumph of the 1990s?  Which was a big bike then.

What has changed with time is our expectations.  Bike magazines have hyped us into wanting bigger and bigger and more powerful bikes every year.  Somewhere along the way it went too far, and unless you want to pose, a smaller bike really can do everything....inclu ding being fast enough to scare you!

So I think there has been a reaction against 150hp / tyres lasting weeks / fuel consumption worse that a car / excess weight etc etc......and people have rediscovered that smaller bikes are more fun.

Against this a friend has just bought a BMW 1200R because in a few years it will be too late...

AndyB

[Testarossa]

the cubic inch displacement explosion seems more like only since the 90s or so in my mind.

People tend to think that all significant change has happened since they started paying attention at age 20 . . .

But displacement inflation has been with us nearly forever.

Triumph introduced the 500cc Speed Twin in 1937.  By 1973 it had grown to the T140 750.

Honda introduced the CB500/4 in 1971. Eight years later it was a 650.

The first liter-bike I remember was the Goldwing, at 999cc in 1974. Five years later it went to 1100, and then ever upward to 1800 today.

So -- the ceiling has been rising for a long time.

[Mayor_of_BBQ]

Bottom line: It's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow.

And if you don't believe it, you haven't tried it.

This is what seals it for me....  I dearly love my B1100 but I live in the land of tight, twisty mountain roads....  The Breva is great for two-up and long fast rides...  But the v65 can't be beat for screaming thru the hills and hollars

The V65 with Agostini carbon cans (no db killers) off a V7 also sounds a hell of a lot better than my B1100 with Staintune

[SportsterDoc]

I have ridden my eldest son-in-laws Road King.
It was fine for him to ride from Georgia to Arizona, but I would not want it in the canyons.

Side note:  I recall buying a 1967 CB160, when I was stationed at McGuire AFB and the salesman was touting the CB450 as the "Cadillac of motorcycles".
The comments in this thread about displacement inflation are really on the mark.

From 1963 to 2005, the displacement of each bike increased.   For simplicity, let's leave dirt bikes out.

However, the 2002 H-D Sportster 1200 Sport was replaced in 2102 by a 865 cc Bonneville.   Now the Bonneville has been replaced by a 744 cc V7 II.

The V7 will not do as well as the Bonneville above 75 or so and especially above 85.   However, it has a major plus in the item one category.

1. Love the light weight, even with a 5.5 gallon tank...despite a significant driveway incline, I can still push it backwards into the garage.
2. Love the seat height...not too low...not to high
3. Love the ground clearance and lean angle capabilities, which many large displacement newer cruisers lack.

And lastly, in another thread, I mentioned a turn in the north San Fernando Valley, from San Fernando Road to Balboa Boulevard.   I helped more than one big twin rider pick up his bike there.   Getting full dressers upright is not fun and I was 40+ years younger then.

I took the Bonneville to our AZ ranch.   212 miles of highway, then 8 miles of rocky road, then 3/4 miles of Jeep trail.   I got it there, but glad it was not heavier.
Getting it back down was even less fun.   The V7 is going to miss out on that.

I had the Bonneville up to 112 on the Extraterrestrial Highway, 4 years back.   It was still climbing, when an unexpected wind gust from the north moved me from the middle of one lane to middle of the opposite lane.   Zero traffic, but glad the wind did not come from the south, as then I would have been into rocks.   I really should not be doing 100+, even if it were permitted.

If I can cruise at 80 in a 75 MPH zone and still have something left to briefly go to 90 to pass, that is more than enough.   Coming back from Overton, last Friday, I took I15, with traffic running 80-85 and the V7 was only doing ~5K RPM.

Even with under 50 HP, the V7 pulls from stop signs and signals extremely well.

Would I enjoy a BMW R1200R, yes, but, other than acceleration, would I enjoy it as much...probably not, but it is not in my budget, either.   Next month, it will be Social Security only income and I am appreciating filling my V7 tank compared to the tank of my wife's truck!

[SportsterDoc]

It's about accessibility for leasure time too. I'm more likely to jump on a small bike after work to ride the back roads for 30 minutes and return with a smile. Small bikes are fun and no worries about pushing or pulling it around. There has been an escalation in weight and power to market bikes and I think the manufacturers have realized we want small and retro.

You must have a lot of willpower to ride for only 30 minutes!

[SportsterDoc]

So at least some of you would agree that it seems that smaller displacement bikes are enjoying some popularity, if only judging from an expansion of offerings...

Difficult to determine in Las Vegas.
On the city streets, I see plenty smaller bikes.
Around Lake Mead, mostly BT H-D.

[Muzz]

A wee anecdote when it comes to power.

A couple of years ago john r and myself went to the Guzzi rally which was in John's home town, about 650kms from me. I had just been rear ended in my works vehicle the week before and had a frozen and painful whiplash neck. The fact that I was able to do it in one sitting belting in to a gale for half the trip speaks volumes for the comfort. Once down there John's bike had a major issue and we ended up going two up on the Breva. I rode pillion while John piloted due to my neck issues. Together we must scale over 200kgs, as John is far taller than me. By the end of the rally he said he could not believe how well the Breva pulled us around and commented that if he had known how good they were he would have been more than happy with the small block. He described it as a "wee jewel".

Even with our load on, sitting on the back to me it still appeared sprightly and had absolutely no problems hauling us around.

[Air-Cooled]

In the early 70s, 750cc displacement was considered a lot of bike. Honda 350s were considered middle ground. As time went on 900-1000cc seemed to be the middle ground, and for most of us this seemed about right. I loved my Lemans V, but I always felt like the engine was moving a lot of heavy parts around. As technology has improved, 750cc displacement has now far exceeded in power what it was in the 70s, with the added benefit that the bike is lighter in weight and the engine spools up effortlessly. Whether the block is large or small makes no difference to me, as long as the bike has adequate power and its weight is acceptable. I don't particularly like weight savings by substituting plastic parts for metal, and in this regard, both Guzzi and Harley are winners. I can't tell you how much easier and more fun my "small block" Stornello is to ride compared to my "large block" V7 Sport with the same displacement. Both have lots of metal and have that mechanical visceral feel, both have very good power,  but only one is effortless to ride. I suppose the large block, being so under-stressed would last longer, but I'm not certain of that.

[Kev m]

People tend to think that all significant change has happened since they started paying attention at age 20 . . .

But displacement inflation has been with us nearly forever.

Triumph introduced the 500cc Speed Twin in 1937.  By 1973 it had grown to the T140 750.

<snip>

So -- the ceiling has been rising for a long time.

Good point BUT look at the rate of acceleration in CCs.

1937-73 (36 years), increased 250cc

In contrast

1984-2017 (33 years), Harley BTs increased 410cc

And in that time frame Triumph debuted a 2.3L RIII

So I'm saying the rate of growth increased dramatically, but yes, part of it could be my particular perception.

[Kev m]

Doc might be onto something, we might be seeing a backlash or swing of the pendulum with the introduction of a few smaller displacement model replacements.

Any examples other than the Triumphs?

[Testarossa]

Air-cooled made a really good point. Today's 750 makes a ton more power than a 40-year-old 750, at the same weight. Improvements in metallurgy, FI and ignition, redline and water cooling mean you get a lot more performance in a lightweight bike now, so why muscle around a beast?

The only "modern" bike I have in this respect is the F650, a carbureted watercooled thumper. It's a lot more civilized than the TR6R and despite the single lung is smoother at freeway speeds. I seriously considered a Breva 750 before buying this thing, and the decision swung on a screaming good price for the Aprilia/Rotax/Beemer.

[80CX100]

This    "Bottom line: It's more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow"

Even back in 1979 as much as I loved the rush and the power of my Yamaha XS1100,,,,,, my favorite bike, and the only one, I really regretted getting rid of was my SR500.

I've always loved the light, responsive flickability of big singles,,,37 yrs later,,, as much as I love the power and legs of a big bike on the highway,,, my DR650 has more smiles per pound, in a nice simple package, and is the one out of the garage for errands and town runs.

I don't like the feeling of being on a bike, if I'm constantly holding it back,,, I like to twist the throttle,lol,,, but the combination of heavy and ponderous, with high horsepower and speed,,, is the type of thing that will get me in trouble,,, I know that, imho.

fwiw

Kelly

[webmost]

I like to feel like I can just grab my bike by the handlebars and jerk it into the next lane when some brain dead cager decides to lurch from a driveway into my path.

[Adan]

There's significant crossover between the smaller-is-better wave and the retro wave.  Retro bike riders are often mocked for chasing an image rather than performance, but I say, what's wrong with that?  What's wrong with choosing a motorcycle specifically because it inspires feelings that harken back to a bygone days.  Small displacement is part and parcel of that feeling.  You could cross the country on a K1600, in record time, without ever having the feeling you get riding for a few country road hours on a V7.

[tpeever]

Because 50 hp gets you down the road in fine style and 400 lbs is a lot easier to move around the garage or a parking lot than 800 lbs. Went to look at a friend's new bike this weekend. Bike weighs about 700 lbs and is considered a "girls bike" within a certain biking community. WAY too heavy for my taste. Guzzis are on the upper end of the weight distribution for me. Above that, it's just not a motorcycle.

[tazio]

Not a small block guy, sorry, although it may come one day AFTER I'm through getting my
Big block "Jones on".Har,har.
But, and this may have been mentioned here?, Insurance for smaller displacement bikes
would seem cheaper on average, no ?
Just another small block check in the plus column.
 

[Huzo]

Gratuitous shot of my beauty...

Your bike looks spectacular Guzz. Please take the silly leather "thing" off the key. It'll just bugger up the finish on an otherwise gorgeous machine and for no good reason. Can we see the rest of your lovely bike ? and on the topic of why a bigger bike ? For what I do now, I wouldn't want anything smaller. The argument about " my bike'll do anything I want adequately does hold water, but what is it you're doing ? What happens when you're on your perfectly "adequate" V 50 Monza and you have a lot of gear aboard 'cos you like to be comfortable, it's windy as hell on the nose with occasional side gusts at  25 kts, the trucks are doing 110 kph belching diesel back at you and you have 300 k's to go and it's getting dark.... So you decide to pass the 3 transports in front to get some clear air and you feel the throttle touch the stop as you pull out. Bugger all of that, I wouldn't deliberately ride something that was operating close to it's performance margins just to prove a point ( whatever it is), and the term "adequate" is just plain distasteful when used in the context of a bike. Deciding to downsize is perfectly fine, but I hate the feeling that my bike is protesting at the workload it's been given, it just hangs on you like a wet blanket.

[simonome]

OK, I've been looking for an angle on a future Revzilla article based on what seems to me to be a growing popularity of smaller displacement bikes such as the Guzzi smallblock, the Duc Scrambler, Triumph Bonnies, heck even the Harley Sportsters and much of JAPanInc's sub liter line.

So is that a correct impression (that they are becoming more popular in the face of bigger, faster, more capable machines)?

And if you are one who has either forsaken larger bikes or who finds a preference for these smaller machines, why?

I'd really like some testimonials from people (preferably all over the world) who are willing to answer some questions.

Let me know here, and if you might want to participate (answer a half dozen or so questions in an email and maybe provide a pic or two of yourself and your bike) let me know in a PM.

So how about it, WHY?

For me, light is right, so I always drive/ride the smallest, lightest machine I can, and which can satisfy my needs.

I'm 6.5 tall, and I own a BMW 1-series instead of a X-something, because when I drive on twisty roads, I can feel the difference (by the way, regardless what "people" say, you can carry a great deal of stuff in a small car, that has a decent trunk lid. I could drive the entire family of 3, with full baggage for a 2-weeks vacation, including diapers, grocery and a folding baby bed.

Going back to bikes, I went for the small frame for the same reason. And I went for the V75, so that I could have the biggest available engine in the smallest available frame.

Reasons are 2:
- practicality: when I ride in Milano, every kg and every cm counts. a smaller turning radius could make the difference between queueing up among all those cars in that narrow street, and being able to zip away.
- fun: light is right

[Muzz]

The only "modern" bike I have in this respect is the F650, a carbureted watercooled thumper. It's a lot more civilized than the TR6R and despite the single lung is smoother at freeway speeds. I seriously considered a Breva 750 before buying this thing, and the decision swung on a screaming good price for the Aprilia/Rotax/Beemer.

The funny thing was that I rode the CS650 (belt drive) and it just did not feel right. After a lot of miles on a bike the where the headlight pointed where the bike was heading I could not get used to the fact that the headlight pointed straight ahead on the CS. Coupled to that, the one I test rode was the single plugged model and it had a surge at 50kmh., which put me right off. The ones on the water were evidently twin plugged which was supposed to get rid of the surge.

When I sat on the Breva it just felt right. End of story.

[Hymes Inc.]

                   I think of myself as a mostly practical guy...mostly. When it comes to motorcycles I believe anything over 850cc is really wasted. My V7 has all the power I would ever need. I had a GS1100E for a short period of time and by todays standards its small. That thing was way to fast. It was fun for all of 4 seconds and then you were going to get into real trouble. I understand that some people like big body bikes because they feel more stable or comfortable to them. But do ya really need 1800cc to pull it around? I get the wonderful feeling of torque and a big fat bike with an 850 in probably wouldn't cut the mustard. My attitude towards big bikes probably isn't helped by the fact that I'm 5'6". I like to tell people that offer me to ride their whale bikes, "if I can't pick it up by myself if it falls over, I'm not riding it". 
                  Funny story about me calling them whale bikes, I was riding with my older brother (1300cc Yamaha Royal star) and my uncle (1800cc Indian) and we came upon a dead end. I just whipped around on my V65c and then proceeded to chuckle as they wrestled with their bikes making 4 point turns. The whole time all I could hear in my head was whale noises.   

[Kev m]

Great responses all.

I've got some ideas and will hopefully try to put "pen to paper" tomorrow.

But don't let that stop you... I like hearing the different points of view (even if many aren't all that different).

[Adk.IBO]

Guess I was omitted from the parameters based on size. At 5'3" 130# the largest bikes have been more than I've been willing to live with long term. 1200cc has been my largest, my Norge and Roadster. Probably the most enjoyable test ride ever taken was on the V7II. Other factors tilted the scale to the Roadster on this most recent purchase, and not one included "bad ass", loud pipes, or tattoos. Time will tell. I like them all (brands, styles, ect..), pretty much anything 2 wheels. Shoulda been a test rider/writer for a magazine . Glad to see smaller gaining in popularity. Nuff said I guess...

[rocker59]

OK, I've been looking for an angle on a future Revzilla article based on what seems to me to be a growing popularity of smaller displacement bikes such as the Guzzi smallblock, the Duc Scrambler, Triumph Bonnies, heck even the Harley Sportsters and much of JAPanInc's sub liter line.

So is that a correct impression (that they are becoming more popular in the face of bigger, faster, more capable machines)?

And if you are one who has either forsaken larger bikes or who finds a preference for these smaller machines, why?

I'd really like some testimonials from people (preferably all over the world) who are willing to answer some questions.

Let me know here, and if you might want to participate (answer a half dozen or so questions in an email and maybe provide a pic or two of yourself and your bike) let me know in a PM.

So how about it, WHY?

My take on it:

Older riders wanting lighter bikes that are economically priced and classically styled.

Yes, I know there are some younger riders on V7s/Bonnies/etc..  They would fall into the "economically priced and classically styled" part of the equation.

[rocker59]

Not a small block guy, sorry, although it may come one day AFTER I'm through getting my
Big block "Jones on".Har,har.
But, and this may have been mentioned here?, Insurance for smaller displacement bikes
would seem cheaper on average, no ?
Just another small block check in the plus column.
 

I have owned both big blocks and small blocks.  Negligible/Nominal difference in insurance pricing, so that would not be a deciding factor, in my experience.

[Kev m]

I have owned both big blocks and small blocks.  Negligible/Nominal difference in insurance pricing, so that would not be a deciding factor, in my experience.

That probably depends on where you live and how old you are too though.