A New Trend with Older riders

[Triple Jim]

The local Yamaha dealer was offering demo rides on Yamaha bikes last weekend and I got to ride the FZ-07 amongst others.  It was a really nice bike with lots of power and very flickable, but it kind of reminded me of why I like my Guzzi as I'm more about feeling the wind in my face and taking things in than going as fast as I can or leaning my bike over as much as I can.

Well, if I wanted to go fast, I'd be thinking about an FZ-09 or FZ-10.      The FZ-07 only makes 67 rwhp, way less than a Griso.  The biggest problem I have with the FZ-07 is its  3.7 gallon gas tank that by reports really holds more like 3.4 gallons.

[Kev m]

We had an exhaustive discussion of these issues recently. See
http://wildguzzi.com/forum/index.php?topic=88923.0

And the Revzilla Common Tread article I wrote from that had very long legs with lots of engagement too (250 comments and 4,600 likes on FB so far):

https://www.revzilla.com/common-tread/why-some-riders-are-downsizing-to-smaller-motorcycles

Which I really just think means it resonates with a lot of people for the reasons we discussed in that and this thread.

[blackcat]

Just out of curiosity, I compared the weight of my 1000S and CX to the typical small block. Downsizing for me would save about 20lbs and the loss of horsepower, so it doesn't quite make sense for me.

[Kev m]

Just out of curiosity, I compared the weight of my 1000S and CX to the typical small block. Downsizing for me would save about 20lbs and the loss of horsepower, so it doesn't quite make sense for me.

Really, what are the actual wet weights of the 1000S and CX? (Just curious).

EDIT - don't know the accuracy, but I'm already thinking maybe you're comparing DRY vs WET or the best number vs the worst number:

http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/moto%20guzzi/moto_guzzi_1000s%2089.htm

1990 1000S - suggests Dry 475# and Wet#503#

https://www.bikez.com/motorcycles/moto_guzzi_1000_s_1991.php

1991 1000S - suggests 533# (doesn't say, but let's assume Wet).

http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/moto%20guzzi/moto_guzzi%20cx100.htm

1979 CX 1000 - suggests - Dry 433# (that sounds pretty darn good).

http://www.motorcycleclassics.com/classic-italian-motorcycles/classic-moto-guzzi-motorcycles/moto-guzzi-le-mans-cx100-zmmz15mjzhur

1979-82 Lemans CX - suggests Wet 530#

I thinking that 79 CX number might be fabrication.


For comparison:

Between MCN and Motorcyclist online, Wet Weights:

V7 (1TB) - 450# (Stone) - Racer - 442#
V7 II - 454#
V7 III - 461#
Roamer - 463#
Bobber - 473#


V11 Sport - 524#
Griso 1100 - 543#
Griso 1200 - 548#
Breva 1100 - 562#
Black Eagle - 589#
Cal-Vin - 616#
Norge - 617#


So yeah, if the 1000S number is correct at 503# - vs say the Bobber at 473# you're only at 30#

But if 533# is correct, and say you're comparing it to a mki 1TB V7 Racer at 443# you're at 91#

And obviously if someone had anything late-model - Norge-Griso-B11 - there's 100# or more to be had if wanted.

[blackcat]

The CX owner's manual says 431 lbs dry and in my case the heavy stuff has been removed so it's probably net that amount with fluids give or take a few pounds. Hell, the stock wiring harness alone must weigh 30lbs.

The 1000S owner's manual says 474 lbs + fluids so the 503lbs is probably correct.

Of course I have never weighed either bike, but my seat of the pants back to back riding of a small block and either of the above bikes tells me they are fairly close in feel.

The weird thing about the weight difference between both of those bikes is the fact that they are basically the same bike. Same tank, same side panels, same frame except a slightly longer swing arm on the 1000S.  Lighter fenders on the CX but no upper and lower fairing on the 1000S. The 1000S engine probably weighs more but that is a guess and it can't be by much. The cast wheels have to weigh more on the CX than the spokes on the 1000S.   

[sidecarnutz]

I got tagged by a welfare queen in a stolen car 22 years ago. Both legs crushed. Shoulders torn. Bike totaled. Add in my Navy career of getting my hands torn up as a steam plant mechanic and I am in rough shape. Grateful to still be here and riding a bit.

That's why I have a sidecar on my old Cali III and my two wheeler is a old Royal Enfield 500 Bullet. Lighter bikes are fun. The Bullet feel like a ten speed bike with a small steam engine attached. (About as fast too. ;-) )

[Kev m]

The CX owner's manual says 431 lbs dry and in my case the heavy stuff has been removed so it's probably net that amount with fluids give or take a few pounds. Hell, the stock wiring harness alone must weigh 30lbs.

The 1000S owner's manual says 474 lbs + fluids so the 503lbs is probably correct.

Of course I have never weighed either bike, but my seat of the pants back to back riding of a small block and either of the above bikes tells me they are fairly close in feel.

The weird thing about the weight difference between both of those bikes is the fact that they are basically the same bike. Same tank, same side panels, same frame except a slightly longer swing arm on the 1000S.  Lighter fenders on the CX but no upper and lower fairing on the 1000S. The 1000S engine probably weighs more but that is a guess and it can't be by much. The cast wheels have to weigh more on the CX than the spokes on the 1000S.

Looking at the later model stuff that I owned the differences were interesting too.

Jackal @ ~572# wet felt LIGHTER than the taller center of gravity Breva 1100 @ ~562# wet.

Either way the V7 feels like a toy comparatively @ ~ 450# wet, and honestly at that point doesn't really feel any heavier than our Duc 696 @ ~ 408# wet.

The Jackal hides its weight with seat height/center of gravity but there's still a definite mass difference between it and the two smaller bikes.

The lighter weight combined with the narrowness and still relatively low seat height of both the V7 and Duc still make them both feel significantly lighter.

YMMV

[Penderic]

Take a ride on the scenic railway?


 

[blackcat]

The lighter weight combined with the narrowness and still relatively low seat height of both the V7 and Duc still make them both feel significantly lighter.

YMMV

A good friend of mine had the same Duc, and we would swap bikes(CX) on occasion. I never noticed much of a weight difference but his was a 03?  My Norge and your Big Breva are definitely porker's compared to the small blocks and I'm on guard at slow speeds with the Norge.

[Northern Bill]

After reading this thread so far I am surprised at what is considered a light bike!  I guess everything is relative.

I play hockey 4 times a week and consider myself pretty fit but I have just got tired of big bikes, and that includes a lot of the bikes described as light in this thread.  I know some people like to cruise around but for me I like twisty roads or the race track.  Over the years I have had a lot of bikes, big and small.  I think the big bikes were more of an ego thing because eventually I came to realize that I could go through serious twisties way faster on my smaller bikes than my bigger ones.  On track days I have had a Buell, a Moto Guzzi Le Mans 4, and an assortment of Honda 650 Hawks but the bike that I have gone the fastest on (excluding the straights) is my 1987 Honda 250 CBX. It only has about 22 horsepower and it now weighs around 200 pounds but I can get it around the track way faster than any of my bigger bikes. My new bike, a 2010 Kawasaki 250 Super Sherpa is pretty amazing.  I wouldn't want to take it on a major trip, although some have taken this particular model on cross continent trips, but for trips around here it is great.  It weighs 280 pounds wet and will cruise all day at 60 mph on pavement or gravel.  I mention gravel, because around here they are the only roads without radar.

[Triple Jim]

Northern Bill, that's just about the same way I feel.  After a pass on the Dragon with my DT100 that I set up just for that road, I rode back to the motel smiling, and talked to a friend in the parking lot.  He's a guy who can drag an elbow if he decides to.  When I told him how much fun I just had with the 100, he looked at me very seriously and said "Little bikes are the most fun."

[Kev m]

A good friend of mine had the same Duc, and we would swap bikes(CX) on occasion. I never noticed much of a weight difference but his was a 03?  My Norge and your Big Breva are definitely porker's compared to the small blocks and I'm on guard at slow speeds with the Norge.

Hmmm, same Duc but 03, meaning one of the smaller Monsters?

Keep in mind there's some difference between the 696 and the rest of the monsters in that era. Shorter suspension puts it an inch lower. So I think it feels even lighter than a 796 (which it in fact is at 408# vs. 446#).

I forget if the 620 also had the lowered seat height, but I don't think it did, and it was 424# in 02, but 449# around 05ish.

The 750 was also about the same 425#.

But I've not ridden or even stood up a CX Lemans, so I really have no frame of reference and will have to take your word on it.

[Northern Bill]

Northern Bill, that's just about the same way I feel.  After a pass on the Dragon with my DT100 that I set up just for that road, I rode back to the motel smiling, and talked to a friend in the parking lot.  He's a guy who can drag an elbow if he decides to.  When I told him how much fun I just had with the 100, he looked at me very seriously and said "Little bikes are the most fun."

I rode the Dragon a few years back on a Suzuki Sv650 (known to be a beginners bike!).  I would have gladly traded you rides on the DT100. That bike was so overpowered for me on that road it was unbelievable.  I know there are guys that can take much more powerful bikes down that road at fantastic speeds but they are super talented and are way beyond my riding ability.  Or as my friend who is a road racer said to me at the time "they just have bigger balls"

I just came back from another ride on my Super Sherpa.  I was looking for gravel roads but instead found some twisties I had never encountered before.  On my street bikes they would have been a nightmare as the surface was horrible but on the Sherpa I just ploughed through the bumps and potholes without a care in the world.  Mind you I was only going about 50mph but on my other bikes I would have been slowed to a crawl. 

The other funny thing that is happening is that the slower speeds I am going at are starting to have a cumulative effect on me so when I do rev the bike out and get up to 65 and 70 I feel like I am flying.  I remember the same thing on some of my old British bikes where I was going pretty slow but had the sensation of going much faster.  Essentially I am getting the same buzz at slower speeds.  At the opposite end of the spectrum, I read a review of the 2017 GSXR last night and the tester was saying that he had a feeling that the bike was just meandering down the straightaway when he looked at the speedo and saw an indicated 180mph!!!

[Triple Jim]

The other funny thing that is happening is that the slower speeds I am going at are starting to have a cumulative effect on me so when I do rev the bike out and get up to 65 and 70 I feel like I am flying. 

Again, I agree.  I've had the DT100 on the supermoto/go-kart track at VIR a few times.  At the end of the back straight I might get it up to 45, but the track is so convoluted that you really feel like you're racing.  I've crashed a couple times on that track too, and they've been nearly painless.

[Darren Williams]

I have been thinking about this lately. My story, went sport bikes and dirt bikes to more standard and touring. A 1200 Sport was my first really touring bike, hard bags and such, in over a decade. Then to a Stelvio, and then a GS and FJR (see the trend of bigger and heavier).  Now my wife had a 750 Breva and a CB500X, which she liked both bikes but complained about trouble keeping up with the more powerful bikes of mine and our kids.  So to remedy the situation we traded up for her to a FJ09. Not much more weight than the Honda, but much better suspension and loads more power. 

After riding it a bit myself, just around town and commuting to work and such, I was thinking this could be a real nice machine when I decide the FJR is just too big and heavy for me to muscle around, the garage , parking lots, and twisties.  She can go back to her CB500X.   

[stonelover]

What is "bigger"?  I began riding in 1955 when 350's (21 CI) were considered "middle" and 500's (30.5 CI) were "large"  A 650 (40 CI) was the undisputed "big bike".  My Stone II serves me well in all conditions; that is city or country, riding solo or with a passenger.  What more does one need??

[Tom]

For some, "there is no replacement for displacement."   

[Psychopasta]

I think for lots of people bigger equates to better. It takes experience to find out that's not always the case. I am finding my 800cc Triumph Tiger to be just about perfect for Washington state.

- P

[redhawk47]

I did the usual progression to "bigger and better" ending with a Stelvio. Great bike, excellent touring machine. But I like to ride alone, and check out dirt roads. No way I could pick that up by myself. Traded it for a V7II - I am really happy with it.
But, also about the same time I bought a CSC RX Cyclone, a 250cc "adventure tourer". Two tours in Baja, 2000 miles each, all pavement, have proved that it is a great touring bike if you don't ride the freeways. Then I bought a CSC TT250, a dual sport; it's even lighter and more fun. I feel that I am cornering faster in the twisties than I ever have before.

Not only is it more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow, I feel that I can ride the "slow" bike faster in the corners.

[Triple Jim]

Not only is it more fun to ride a slow bike fast than a fast bike slow, I feel that I can ride the "slow" bike faster in the corners.

That was the thing that made me a believer in little bikes a few years ago.  A friend offered to let me ride his Yamaha 100 on the Dragon.  I was laughing in my helmet as I flew through the curves.

[ChuckH]

Looking at this weight discussion from a different perspective -- leaving Duluth last Sunday morning on my '07 R1200R on the return trip from the MN Guzzi Rally in Grand Marais, I stopped in at the MN DOT weight scale just outside of town.  There were no trucks in sight and I had just filled with fuel so it was a good time to get weighed.  I find the operators are very friendly about allowing me to take advantage of their equipment.

The scale read 880#.  At first glance that's a lot, but as I mentally tabulated what was included, it seemed about right.  The bike was fully loaded for the 2100 mile round trip, full of fuel (4.7 Ga) and I was sitting on it.

I'm 200# in my riding equipment and I carry about 80# of gear for the long trips -- so the bike, full of fuel with the rear cases, top case, tank panniers, tank bag mounted but empty is about 600#.  Probably about right.  The bike was advertised at ~540# Wet but without the windshield, center stand, emergency fuel supply and all the above mentioned cases, plus their mounting hardware.  I'm certain that in total they would add up to that extra 60#.

Interesting information in this discussion.  Ride safe.



 

[guzzista]

Referring to the OP,this is not a "new trend". Back in the 1980's , MGNOC  newsletters had  submitted articles from older riders either moving on or considering moving on from their beloved Loops due to advancing age and thinking about / riding smaller , lighter bikes. Perhaps as we age and we are lucky to still be able to ride, it is just the natural progression of thing. Happy Fourth of July to all.

[vstevens]

Took a Friday ride on the V7 stone.  Freeway for maybe 20 miles and about twice that on curvy back-country roads.  The Interstate is not fun, more speed accompanied by more wind and noise... uncomfortable for me on the V7 (a road king would do nicely here).  But the 'B' roads are marvelous on the V7.  Plenty speed, lots of sweepers and hairpins to keep me interested... and the air is tasty, scenery is often breathtaking, and I can SLO's down to take it all in if I want to.  Yeah, smaller bikes are for me.

[charlie b]

About half the Honda NT700 riders that I ran into bought them cause they were so much lighter than their old biikes (Connie, FJR, ST1300, HD, GW).  Their knees and hips had too much trouble with the larger bikes.  Over time a few migrated back to bigger bikes for the power and comfort at highway speeds.

I've always wanted lighter bikes, even when I was younger.  So, for me it was not an age thing, simply a preference for the type of bike I liked to ride.

[pyoungbl]

There must be a pretty strong demand for smaller and lighter bikes.  Look at the fact that BMW, Kawi, Honda, and Yamaha have all brought out 250-300cc ADV bikes in the last few years.  These, at first glance, might look like they are aimed at beginners.  I think the real market is for those of us who are down sizing.  I know of at least 4 Stelvio owners who have bought 250cc ADV bikes (myself included).  They are simple, fun to ride, and easy to move around.  I can still go motorcycle camping with the 250, just cannot drag along the kitchen sink.

Peter Y.

[blackcat]

About half the Honda NT700 riders that I ran into bought them cause they were so much lighter than their old biikes (Connie, FJR, ST1300, HD, GW).  Their knees and hips had too much trouble with the larger bikes.  Over time a few migrated back to bigger bikes for the power and comfort at highway speeds.

I've always wanted lighter bikes, even when I was younger.  So, for me it was not an age thing, simply a preference for the type of bike I liked to ride.

Compared to those bikes the Honda is light, but at 571 lbs. wet, it isn't that light.

[Triple Jim]

I think the real market is for those of us who are down sizing.

It may be more that a lot of countries make smaller motorcycles much easier and cheaper to register, and that developing countries don't have many people who can afford bigger ones.

[Tom]

Most people know the best performance upgrades that don't cost anything are 1)  Resetting the ecu behind the handlebars. 2)  Losing weight being carried by the bike.

Pack less junk when touring and lose body weight.     Most here aren't the "Ride to eat.  Eat to ride." crowd. 

[Kev m]

For reference.
My '81 CX
Bub exhaust
hyd steering damper
radial tires
No side fairings
small glass mat bat
3 Qt oil
5 gal gas
All else stock
Weighed by me on good scales
489 #
Edit:
I do have after market clip ons and rear sets, which are slightly lighter, 2 lb?

Thanks for the data.

[Litre1000]

I'm only 52. My Victory Vision got sold in February because I have two small hernias and a sore shoulder. Moving the bike around the shop and at watering holes would aggravate the hernias and shoulder. So I thought a lighter bike was needed. Test rode a new Multistrada 950. No way I would use that bike for touring. Seat too thin with no padding. Knees bent way too tight. The Ducati shop suggested I try a 2012 Multistrada. Or a 2013 Diavel. Not sure about Ducati reliability. So I looked at the Norge and Stelvio. The Norge felt too small overall while bending the knees too much. The Stelvio felt roomy and comfortable just sitting on it. I didn't care for the super lightweight feel of the Ducati's. It gives me a feel of "cheapness". Knowing the Guzzis' are heavier makes me feel better about using one for touring. My Victory bikes have been VERY reliable. That trait and experience is paramount considering my next purchase. So, having NO experience with either the 2012 MTS or the 2016 Stelvio NTX...is it safe to assume the Guzzi will be the more reliable bike?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk