Author Topic: Rollerization not necessary?  (Read 30835 times)

Offline Huzo

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 13832
  • Location: Creswick Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #120 on: May 29, 2018, 05:54:39 PM »
assclowns
Just a little more so I can get your point Low Ryter..
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 06:15:36 PM by Huzo »

Offline jacksonracingcomau

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2389
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #121 on: May 29, 2018, 06:08:24 PM »
What relevance does the price of the kits have? I�m struggling to see your point???

Apologies if you or anyone thought I was being contentious
Point was only that kit for taking head off is prohibitive
Using cheap kit and air to fit spacer (or not fit spacer at all) possibly common
Therefore factory figures on kits sold possibly inconclusive as to years of failures

Kits sold the only possible way that factory determine how many actually have failed
Even though they know all could, many will never do any miles.
Your detruction test took 50k odd miles, 40 year old bikes are turning up on this site with way less.
No reason to believe same won�t happen
Parked they are safe as houses.
Until.............

Offline guzzisteve

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 12284
  • "Just Ride It"
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #122 on: May 29, 2018, 06:11:59 PM »
"Bailiff Wack His Pee Pee"
"Pray through Carlo & your bike shall be healed"
Location: Planet Earth

Offline Huzo

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 13832
  • Location: Creswick Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #123 on: May 29, 2018, 06:14:40 PM »
For us who have lived through the whole sorry roller tappet saga and those who haven't it should be remembered it was Piaggio/Guzzi who cocked up the design and the subsequent failed modifications. The factory did not do the right  thing and recall all bikes for a roller conversion but instead adopted  a wait and see approach which let down the owners and created a lot of bad feeling even from dealers who were stuck trying to sell products doomed to failure.
I even wrote to UK Bike magazine to correct their review of used Grisos, saying they were misleading readers and potential buyers by not mentioning tappet failure, which they failed to rectify.
Pete Roper has more than made up for his early defending of the design when nothing was forthcoming from the factory on the subject and most people were in the dark. If it wasn't for forums such as this and the people who contribute to them there would be a lot more bikes with trashed engines by now.
He (or anyone else) does not have to "make up" for anything.
There are a couple of gems laying around here in the Aussie dirt and some (mores scarce) ones overseas.
Last time I checked, none of us had paid anything for their advice and we're not compelled to take it.
Anyone who wants to tear these guys down in the face of overwhelming evidence that they are correct, is just trying to assume the same level of credibility without having to work to attain it.
Maybe the only reason some of these flatties haven't failed, is that they're not ridden..
I trust the mechanical life of my Norge on the word of two Aussies and would do so if it were an early Stelvio or 8V Norge just as readily.
« Last Edit: May 29, 2018, 06:19:13 PM by Huzo »

Offline Chuck in Indiana

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 29643
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #124 on: May 29, 2018, 06:25:07 PM »
<Not bashing the motor company>
Quote
Maybe he only reason some of these fatties haven't failed, is that they're not ridden..
Harley did exactly that a few years ago, knowing that many if not most of those poser's  :evil: bikes wouldn't fail before the warranty ran out..
Don't remember the exact issue, but Kev can probably fill us in. Doesn't matter. It sucks when a company treats their customers like that.
Oh never mind.. let's move on.
Chuck in (Elwood) Indiana/sometimes SoCal
 
87 AeroLario
95 Skorpion tour
25 Triumph Speed 900
 "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein

Offline Huzo

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 13832
  • Location: Creswick Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #125 on: May 29, 2018, 06:31:48 PM »
<Not bashing the motor company>Harley did exactly that a few years ago, knowing that many if not most of those poser's  :evil: bikes wouldn't fail before the warranty ran out..
Don't remember the exact issue, but Kev can probably fill us in. Doesn't matter. It sucks when a company treats their customers like that.
Oh never mind.. let's move on.
99.5% of us have Chuck...

Offline Paul Brooking

  • Gosling
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
  • Location: Adelaide South Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #126 on: May 29, 2018, 06:59:35 PM »
Well said Huzo
I was very happy to buy an 8v knowing that the roller/flat issue had been rectified with direct input from two Australian “Gentlemen” and the combined wit of the Guzzi Geezer community.
Will probably buy another 8v as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline LowRyter

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 16785
  • Location: Edmond OK
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #127 on: May 29, 2018, 07:03:11 PM »
<Not bashing the motor company>Harley did exactly that a few years ago, knowing that many if not most of those poser's  :evil: bikes wouldn't fail before the warranty ran out..
Don't remember the exact issue, but Kev can probably fill us in. Doesn't matter. It sucks when a company treats their customers like that.
Oh never mind.. let's move on.

oil pumps for the first twin cams, I am guessing.
John L 
When life gets you down remember it's one down and the rest are up.  (1-N-23456)

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #128 on: May 29, 2018, 07:35:23 PM »
Look, enough of this nonsense. If anybody wants to save themselves a whole lot of hassle chasing down the rabbit hole of using compressed air to seal the valves while compressing the springs send me a PM and i’ll Explain why it won’t work on the 8V. Yes, you could do it, but it would be infinitely more work than just removing the head.

The end.

Online Kev m

  • Not your normal Hombre
  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 31069
  • Yo from Medford, NJ
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #129 on: May 29, 2018, 07:36:27 PM »
<Not bashing the motor company>Harley did exactly that a few years ago, knowing that many if not most of those poser's  :evil: bikes wouldn't fail before the warranty ran out..
Don't remember the exact issue, but Kev can probably fill us in. Doesn't matter. It sucks when a company treats their customers like that.
Oh never mind.. let's move on.
Slightly different but I get the comparison.

The early Twin Cam motors used spring loaded timing chain tensioners that were a bit too strong and if they weren't checked periodically and replaced before failure they could lunch the motor by fragging the oil pump.

By the next iteration of the TC motors they changed the design to a variable pressure tensioner that still required periodic inspection and replacement, but would last much much longer.

The original design could last 50k or fail by 20k. The revised design may last past 100k.

The early bikes are fine if you keep an eye on it or you might choose to retrofit the new design on your dime. It means new camshafts, timing chain, tensioners, oil pump and some related sundry.

I was (and maybe remain) pretty pissed about the original design. I think it's pretty unforgivable to have to replace timing chain tensioners in normal service (or at least below a couple hundred thousand miles).

But it's way worse to eat camshafts. They really should be lifetime components for gawd's sake.
Current Fleet

18 Guzzi V7III Carbon Dark
13 Guzzi V7 Stone
11 Duc M696

Rough Edge racing

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #130 on: May 30, 2018, 05:23:13 AM »
 I just had an ongoing conversation with Pete about the flat tappet failures and I can say he has done extensive investigation on  the problem from  first hand experience...

 Honda V-4's in the 80's had premature cam wear issues. I believe there were recalls, I don't know if the problem was ever completely resolved.... Valve train issues are not unheard of in the automotive world..

Offline Chuck in Indiana

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 29643
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #131 on: May 30, 2018, 06:08:52 AM »
Quote
Honda V-4's in the 80's had premature cam wear issues. I believe there were recalls, I don't know if the problem was ever completely resolved...

I had one of those bad boys. Honda fooled with it for *quite* a while. Oil to the top end eventually got there after the transmission was done with it. Very low pressure. I eventually tapped into the main oil gallery and ran a dedicated pressure line to the top end using brake line fittings. Another case of complex engineering to do a simple job.. :smiley:
Chuck in (Elwood) Indiana/sometimes SoCal
 
87 AeroLario
95 Skorpion tour
25 Triumph Speed 900
 "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein

Offline Huzo

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 13832
  • Location: Creswick Australia
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #132 on: May 30, 2018, 06:44:51 AM »
I had one of those bad boys. Honda fooled with it for *quite* a while. Oil to the top end eventually got there after the transmission was done with it. Very low pressure. I eventually tapped into the main oil gallery and ran a dedicated pressure line to the top end using brake line fittings. Another case of complex engineering to do a simple job.. :smiley:
Cool...! :bow: :thumb:

Offline John A

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 5315
  • No way to slow down...
  • Location: Hager city ,western WI
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #133 on: May 30, 2018, 06:57:04 AM »
Lycoming aviation engine camshaft and lifters come to mind. They have had problems for years. Continental aviation engines had similar problems. Mostly solved by roller lifters by the time I retired, except for the stuck exhaust valve issues, which I came to believe was predominantly caused by cylinder head temps over 375F and not keeping airspeed up for cooling air while heavy loads were put on the engine. It was my learning  that around those head temps the alloys used in heads have lost up to fifty percent of their strength. Think of exhaust valve guides flopping around like a fish. Some of that must affect our engines but it's a testament to their strength that it's not a bigger problem. My point being there are engine problems in materials and design that affect all of them to some degree. Some manufacturers  have had poor after purchase support.
John
MGNOC L-471
It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled-Mark Twain
99 Bassa, sidecar
02 Stone
84 V65C
15 F3S Spyder

Online Kev m

  • Not your normal Hombre
  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 31069
  • Yo from Medford, NJ
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #134 on: May 30, 2018, 07:05:06 AM »
Lycoming aviation engine camshaft and lifters come to mind. They have had problems for years. Continental aviation engines had similar problems. Mostly solved by roller lifters by the time I retired, except for the stuck exhaust valve issues, which I came to believe was predominantly caused by cylinder head temps over 375F and not keeping airspeed up for cooling air while heavy loads were put on the engine. It was my learning  that around those head temps the alloys used in heads have lost up to fifty percent of their strength. Think of exhaust valve guides flopping around like a fish. Some of that must affect our engines but it's a testament to their strength that it's not a bigger problem. My point being there are engine problems in materials and design that affect all of them to some degree. Some manufacturers  have had poor after purchase support.
Come on guys how long ago do you have to go back for obstract examples?

No modern machine should eat it's camshafts and one manufacturer shouldn't have essentially the same problem more than once.

Either points to internal problems.

Current Fleet

18 Guzzi V7III Carbon Dark
13 Guzzi V7 Stone
11 Duc M696

Offline John A

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 5315
  • No way to slow down...
  • Location: Hager city ,western WI
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #135 on: May 30, 2018, 07:08:08 AM »
Come on guys how long ago do you have to go back for obstract examples?

No modern machine should eat it's camshafts and one manufacturer shouldn't have essentially the same problem more than once.

Either points to internal problems.


Agree
John
MGNOC L-471
It is easier to fool people than it is to convince them that they have been fooled-Mark Twain
99 Bassa, sidecar
02 Stone
84 V65C
15 F3S Spyder

Offline guzzisteve

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 12284
  • "Just Ride It"
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #136 on: May 30, 2018, 08:03:35 AM »
Look, enough of this nonsense. If anybody wants to save themselves a whole lot of hassle chasing down the rabbit hole of using compressed air to seal the valves while compressing the springs send me a PM and i’ll Explain why it won’t work on the 8V. Yes, you could do it, but it would be infinitely more work than just removing the head.

The end.
Pete, I had looked into doing it this way. No tooling made for it and you would have to do this first before you took the cam towers off. All that messing around didn't look like it would save any time.  I'm sure Guzzi did a study on it before they came out w/procedure for early 8V.
"Pray through Carlo & your bike shall be healed"
Location: Planet Earth

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #137 on: May 30, 2018, 12:34:41 PM »
I’d looked at the possibility too and almost instantly discarded it. Even writing off the hours to make the tooling you’d still be farting about bolting stuff on and unbolting it, (Twice!) and then there’s the risk of loosing one or more of the tiny collets down the camchain tunnel after you’ve managed to break the taper!

The alternative is to remove six more easy fasteners and just flip the head off and do it all on the bench where it is swift, easy and there’s no risk of loosing or damaging stuff. The stud nuts are removed anyway to remove and replace the cambox. You can't remove the rockers with the cambox in-situ and without the cambox on there is no way, (Without building dedicated tooling.) to clamp the head so if you pressurised the cylinder the head would just lift!

The whole idea is an exercise in futility!

Pete

Offline bad Chad

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • Posts: 9793
  • Location: Central Il
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #138 on: May 30, 2018, 05:59:39 PM »
Wow, I can't  believe i read this entire thread, I really need to get a life!
2025 V85TT
2017 V9 Roamer
2016 CSC 250TT

Offline Markcarovilli

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 1081
  • Location: NE Ohio
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #139 on: May 30, 2018, 06:31:43 PM »
Wow, I can't  believe i read this entire thread, I really need to get a life!

No you just need a rollerized 8V......

Mark

Offline Litre1000

  • Hatchling
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #140 on: May 30, 2018, 07:17:11 PM »
Wow, I can't  believe i read this entire thread, I really need to get a life!
It’s a fantastic read....
Lots of high-quality information!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Offline TN Mark

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 692
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #141 on: May 30, 2018, 08:01:07 PM »
I haven't owned any Moto Guzzi since March of 2013 and I also read this entire thread. I've always loved reading what Guzzi Steve and Pete Roper have written. I have no idea if the subsequent owner(s) of my 2009 Grisio had this issue covered under warranty or not. But if does sadden me to know I traded it off at a dealer in Ohio who , at the time,likely didn't understand the severity of this issue either. At least when I sold the V10 Centauro I also offered the buyer the brand new V11 style oil pump and timing chain kit.
 

twowings

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #142 on: May 30, 2018, 08:15:28 PM »


THE THREAD THAT WOULDN'T DIE!!!!!!!

Online Dave Swanson

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 4491
  • Northern Illinois USA
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #143 on: May 30, 2018, 08:17:48 PM »
No you just need a rollerized 8V......

Mark

I have a 2015 Norge,  and even though the majority of the thread stirred up dust that had settled years ago, I  still found this thread riveting!   I really need a life!

Dave Swanson - Northern IL
1935 GTS
1968 V700
1973 V7 Sport
1974 Eldo
1974 Police Eldo
1976 Convert
1977 Lemans 1.2
1980 T3 California
1993 1000S - Sparklehorse
1998 V11 EV HDM
2004 V11S - Eraldo-ized
2016 Griso SE - Beetle-ized
2021 V7-850 Stone Centenario
2022 V85TT
2023 V100S

MGNOC L-780

Offline Chuck in Indiana

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 29643
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #144 on: May 30, 2018, 08:39:01 PM »
^^^^ That's a pretty bad ride right there, Dave..  :thumb:
Chuck in (Elwood) Indiana/sometimes SoCal
 
87 AeroLario
95 Skorpion tour
25 Triumph Speed 900
 "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe."
Albert Einstein

Online PJPR01

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 4091
  • Norge, Scura, Griso, Goldwing
  • Location: Houston, Texas
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #145 on: May 30, 2018, 10:13:59 PM »
Very nice chocolatey Norge! 

This thread has been very lively, perhaps a live demo could be done by each, posted to Youtube for further visual entertainment!



Paul R
2021 Honda Goldwing Bagger Manual Cement Gray
2015 Red/Black Griso
2008 Silver Norge
2002 V11 Scura

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #146 on: May 31, 2018, 02:08:07 AM »
^^^^ That's a pretty bad ride right there, Dave..  :thumb:

That will eat slab like you wouldn’t believe but still won’t be embarrassed when you get somewhere interesting. 8V Norges are rare as hen’s teeth over here. A bit like big tank Stelvios, those who have them are hanging on to them.

Pete

Offline Litre1000

  • Hatchling
  • **
  • Posts: 107
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #147 on: May 31, 2018, 05:16:05 AM »
So, knowing all this 8V tappet drama, has anyone just bought the damn bike and dove right in to righting the issue? Sure, if the buy-in price is right, go ahead. But what if the price isn’t right? Do people pay “top-dollar” just to have the bike? And then dump 2 grand into it? I know it’s a stupid question ....but Moto Guzzis are rare to find....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

pete roper

  • Guest
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #148 on: May 31, 2018, 05:28:07 AM »
People pay what they think they’re worth. The problem is very few people actually do much research so they don’t know issues and also a lot of vendors have stars in their eyes and think their bikes are worth far more than they will actually bring.

Do people buy them at top dollar and then spend money fixing them? Sure, a lot of the rollerisations we do nowadays are done on the owners dime because either the bike doesn’t have a full service history or they can’t get their dealer to even look at the tappets. They love the bike, roll their shoulders in and just go ahead and deal with it. Sure there are some who will learn of the problem and then flick the bike on with no disclosure but arseholes are ten a penny, you’ll never get past that. On the whole though our customers are very happy after rollerisation and a re-map and keep their bikes.

Pete

Offline molly

  • Gaggle Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 1320
Re: Rollerization not necessary?
« Reply #149 on: May 31, 2018, 05:32:00 AM »
So, knowing all this 8V tappet drama, has anyone just bought the damn bike and dove right in to righting the issue? Sure, if the buy-in price is right, go ahead. But what if the price isn�t right? Do people pay �top-dollar� just to have the bike? And then dump 2 grand into it? I know it�s a stupid question ....but Moto Guzzis are rare to find....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was very close to buying a new 1200 8V Sport on the premise that the dealer would immediately put in a claim for a roller conversion. I did trust the dealer and he is well versed in getting Guzzi to pay for roller work. He has a pile of scrap cam gear which matches Pete Roper's collection.
At the end of the day I pulled out of the deal and bought a Triumph Tiger 1200 Sport which I quickly got bored with and replaced with a 1100 GRISO.
« Last Edit: May 31, 2018, 05:33:21 AM by molly »
Dave

Lincolnshire, U.K.

Griso 1100


NEW WILDGUZZI PRODUCT - Moto Guzzi Door Mat
Receive donation credit with door mat purchase!
Advertise Here
 


NEW WILDGUZZI PRODUCT - Moto Guzzi Door Mat
Receive donation credit with door mat purchase!
Advertise Here