Cal Rear Gear Swap

After having my Stone for a few years now, I can say that I was never truly happy with the stock 8:33 gearing. All my shift points where right where I was used to riding curves at and 5th gear was useless below 80mph. Actually looking back at historical Guzzi data, the 8:33 is a relatively new gear set, all the older model bikes and original California’s used the 7:33 or some other. Don’t know why Guzzi changed. I finally decided to make a change and go to a 7:33 drive. I purchased a new gear set and ring gear bolts (www.mgcycle.com) and sent it all off to racer Charlie Cole to set up. He's THE GUY for setting up rear drives. Before I sent it, I also applied a isotropic finish to my gears since I have access to such services (see http://www.taylor-race.com/isotropic.cfm - http://www.remchem.com/c.htm http://www.mrracingequipment.com/M&R%20Racing%20Equipment%20-%20rem.htm - http://216.219.233.39/text/109_1.pdf to educate yourself). The process is NOT 'snake oil'. It works and is proven. Gears finished in this method will heat up much less at initial break in and will run cooler over their life. NASCAR teams have been doing this for years. Charlie was much impressed by the finish - he said the gears had the best load trace he had ever seen. I noticed after running about 30 miles that my rear drive seemed cooler. It also cooled down VERY quickly after the bike set.

If you want a reasonably accurate speedo, you need to change the 5/10 speedo gear set out for a 5/11 set (14762510 www.mgcycle.com). You ONLY need to change the 10 tooth gear for the 11 tooth. In order to get a nice straight shot at it, I removed the gas tank and air box. Then, remove the speedo cable. Stick an allen wrench in where the speedo cable was to hold the gear and remove the gear keeper (14mm wrench I think). Now, lift the gear straight up and out. If everything works out right, the hardened washer below the gear will either come out with the gear or stay where it should. Since I removed the air box, I could see straight down in and see that my washer was still there. Slide in the new 11 tooth-er and put everything back together. If the hardened washer is nowhere to be found, YOU MUST take apart the rear of the tranny and find it. As far as speedo accuracy, mine was fairly good to start off with. I went on a ride with some Honda guys in October with the 8:33 rear drive and 5/10 speedo gears and at each gas stop (100-120 miles), I was always with 1 to 2 miles of them on the odometer and out speeds we traveled the roads at also matched up pretty good. However, the 5/11 speedo gear set is really much better suited to an 8/37 rear drive. Going from the 8:33 to the 7:33 is a 12.5% change. The speedo gears went from a 5:10 to a 5:11. This is only 9.1% change in speedo cable RPM, thus there will be a about a 3.8% or so error in speedo reading - that is, it will read 60 MPH when you are doing around 57. Not too bad. If one went from an 8:33 to an 8:37; that is only a 10.8% change in gearing, which is closer to the change in the speedo gearing.

After my first ride, all I can say is the 7:33 drive ROCKS AND ROLLS. Pick up off the starting line is, ummm, spirited. I like the new found acceleration. Overall drive line seems smoother also. I'm happy with it. The bike should have been delivered with a 7:33. Anyway, I went back out and compared the distance I rode with my truck odometer, and in one stretch, the truck said 6.3 miles and the bike said 6.6 - or about a 4.8% difference which is close to the predicted error of around 3.8%. I followed a guy on another stretch for several miles. My speedo rang up just at 55 miles an hour. At a stop light I asked him what he was doing, and he said just a

touch over 50. With the 4.8% error I figured from comparing odometers between the bike and truck, my 55 bike speedo means I was going about 52mph, which jives with the guy who said he was doing a touch over 50. Needless to say, it's close enough for me! Anywhere from 1 mph to 5mph off depending how fast. I roared along at an indicated 85 (probably actually speed of touch over 80) in 5th, and it was smooth as glass on the highway. Uphill corners that had previously given me problems because of shift points were a breeze.

Note! THIS IS NOT A CHEAP MOD. The new gear sets go for over $400, the ring gear bolts were $90 or so, the speedo gears were $70 or so, and then I had to pay Charlie some also. ALSO.... the 2002 and up model year bikes use different ring gear carriers because of modifications to fit a wider swingarm The drive splines for the ring gear carrier stick out of the rear drive farther. If you use a rear drive off of a pre 2002 bike, you MAY have reduced contact between the rear drive splines and the rear wheel splines.

Before I did this, I hooked up with a guy thru a Ducati site that does a real wiz-bang computer gearing analysis. I have attached my discussions with him…

Gearing Guru Performance Modeling Gearing Recommendation

For: Jeffrey Brannen

Date: 12-07-04

Vehicle: 2002 Moto Guzzi California Stone – modified engine

This report is based on your questionnaire answers:

Tell us what kind of rider you are:

My motorcycle is mainly used for commuting on the highway to work and running the twisty roads on the weekend trying to keep pace with a friends Monster 900. I ride as hard as this bike will let me, usually not breaking the law by more than 15mph or so, sometimes more (like 55-60 in 35 on West Virginia mountain roads). My usual cruising shift points are (shift by speedo as I have no tach):

1^st to 2^nd - 25mph

2^nd to 3^rd – 40 to 42 mph

3^rd to 4^th – 60-62 mph

4^th to 5^th – 75 to 80 mph

Of course, these shift points are done using an Italian speedometer that are known to me 5%-7% off or so (are Ducati’s speedos inaccurate too?). I usually cruise on the freeway at 60mph in 3^rd hear or 75mph in 4^th as those are good smooth spots for the motor. I rarely see 5^th gear. It will cruise in 5^th around 75mph, but roll-on performance from 75 in 5^th gear is weak. Same with 4^th – it will cruise at 55 to 60mph in fourth on the open road, but roll on from that point is weak. I feel much of this is due to the flat/dip in the engines mid-range which is inherent to all Moto Guzzi models.

What make and model of motorcycle do you want this analysis done for?

2002 Moto Guzzi California Stone

PRIMARY RATIO 17/21

1^st GEAR 14/28

2^ND GEAR 18/25

3^RD GEAR 21/22

4^TH GEAR 23/20

5^TH GEAR 28/21

STOCK REAR 8/33

AFTERMARKET GEAR IN CONSIDERATION 7/33

Most guys opt for a 7/33 gear if they change. Others available (but hard to find) are 8/35 and 8/37. These 2 gear sets are hard to find, that is why most go to the 7/33. Is is readily available and is made in sets to fit every rear end.

Bore: 92mm

Stroke: 80mm

1064cc 90 degree V-twin mounted transverse in frame. Air cooled, pushrod motor.

Has the motorcycle been modified in any way that affects aerodynamics, weight, or rotational inertia?

(e.g. added fairing, aftermarket exhaust, lightened flywheel or wheels) If so, provide detailed data.

The machine has a small windscreen and luggage. The luggage is removed most of the time. I know that your acceleration figures will not be exact for my machine because you do not have data for it. Here is what I have managed to find (for bike with no luggage):

Motorcyclist reports ¼ mile in 13.14 seconds at 98.64 mph, top speed 119mph, 0-60 in 4.87 seconds

Cycle World reports ¼ mile in 13.48 seconds at 97.66 mph, top speed 119mph, 0-60 in 4.6 seconds

Reported weights:

Motorcyclist 543 lbs no gas

Cycle Canada 549 lbs WITH gas??

Rake 27 degrees

Trail 5.5”

Rear Tire 140/80-17. I measured the circumference at 80.375”

See attaché pics. Not shown in the pics is that I am now running dual disks on the front. One Brembo was OK, but 2 are even better!!

These times were for stock bikes. I have performance mods that add about 5-7hp/5-7ft-lbs over the machines they tested If you can estimate the aerodynamics to get your simulation close to these times, that would probably work. The real thing to see is the comparison between final drive ratios, as that is the desired outcome of this, not accurate 0-60 and ¼ miles times.

Are you currently running stock gearing (for sure?) or have you already modified it somewhat?

If so, what front and rear sprockets are you currently running?

This is a shaft drive bike. I am running the stock ring and pinion which is an 8/33

We use "stock" rear wheel power curves unless you provide a dyno curve for your specific motorcycle. If you have modified the engine, please attach a copy of your dyno data (from a custom dyno run or from a manufacturer's website for example) to your reply. Does this apply to you?

I have attached an Excel spreadsheet that lists the hp and torque vs. rpm in a tabular format. This was a 4^th gear run on a Dynojet Model 250i. It also shows the elapsed time during the run.

What do you weigh, including the gear you typically wear? (caution: fudging this answer limits the accuracy of our recommendations. Also don't assume that your gear is light. Most is NOT. 10 lb or more is not unusual.)

I weight about 157lbs. 10 lbs of gear would put me in at 167. Figure 170lbs total for sure.

Do you want the weight of a passenger to be part of the analysis and recommendations?

If so, what does he/she weigh (We are not responsible for your significant other killing you for answering honestly)?

No passenger. No luggage.

What is your target usage for this motorcycle? (the more focused or more general you are, the more focused or general our recommendations will be)

Investigating gearing for better backroad blasting. As it stands, the shift points for this bike listed above are right at where I want to run most curves at. This creates problems getting thru corners smoothly. My max freeway cruise is usually 75-80 because tickets are expensive. Most of the time I stick it in 4^th and run along at an indicated 75mph. I only hit 5^th gear and run 80+ when I really need to make time like when going on a long trip, but 80-85 is tops, and rarely seen. I cruised at 90-95mph ONCE in 5^th gear. This was a real sweetspot for the machine, but my bank account could not have afforded a ticket for 30 over.

What are your objectives in requesting gearing analysis and recommendations? Select those that apply from the list below and PRIORITIZE them (1,2,3 etc). Note that some will be inconsistent with others, so don't pick "all" of them! e.g maximized top speed and improved acceleration work against each other!

3 - Improve ability to tour with luggage in hilly or windy conditions?

1 - Improve throttle response and nimbleness at low and city speeds?

5 - Improve throttle response at highway speeds?

4 - Compress top speed down to provide more choices of gears at moderate speeds?

2 - Improve acceleration up to moderate highway speeds (0 to 80mph)?

What is the highest cruising speed you normally maintain for more than a few minutes at a time?

Figure 82MPH. 5^th gear is highest. Normal is 75 in 4^th gear.

How hilly is it where you normally ride?

Ohio has some nice hills. When I go on weekenders to west Virginia, the hills really come into play. Switchbacks going up hills tend to be a problem with getting the machine in the right gear. The people I whip on going down hill usually make up ground when uphill curves are involved. Probably due to my riding style not fitting where the gear selections are. Change gears or change riding style??

Do you often ride at higher elevations (e.g. in the mountains)?

The highest elevation between Ohio and West Virginia is MAYBE 5,000 feet. Not really that high.

Recommendations & Comments:

Using the data you sent, I was able to downgrade your dyno curve to what a stock one would look like, and then, by iteratively trying different combinations of Cd and frontal area, I was able to fairly closely match the 2 magazine test results you quoted, using a “standard 160 lb rider”, although I think the bike should have had a slightly greater terminal velocity if the stock bike is really within 5 to 7 horsepower of your modified engine bike.

Then, I plugged in YOUR actual weight, and your bike’s dyno curve, and ran 4 simulations using ALL four of the available shaft drive gearing options for your bike.

I obviously was unable to “optimize” your gearing, because ONLY these 4 options are available, but the 4 simulations show you your available choices, and I also give you my comments on each!

One important comment: On most bikes these days, the minimum rpm that the engines can be operated at are usually 3000 to 3500 rpm. Your Guzzi is very unusual, in that it accepted full throttle on the dyno at rpm as alow as 2200. I have therefore used 2200 as the minimum rpm in 1^st gear, and that artificially inflates your quarter mile times and zero to x mph times above the theoretical “perfect rider” times, as a magazine tester would rev the engine to at least 3500 (like I did when I was working to duplicate the magazine results in my software) and slip the clutch to get the lowest times. You would not do this on this street, AND if I simulated this, it would also mask the impact of the actual gearing changes to some extent, since slipping the clutch defeats the gearing via an abusive technique. So, your bike would actually “test” quite a bit faster at a dragstrip.

Pages 6 & 7: 33/8 Gearing (Stock)

This is the baseline that all gearing changes will be compared against. It is VERY “European” in its outlook, as 5^th gear is really not very usable at legal U.S. highway speeds.

Note the following:

RPM at 60 mph (want to keep this to a sensible rpm): 3013 (pretty low, even for this low rpm engine)

HP @ 60 mph (Horsepower available in top gear at 60 mph - without a downshift): 32 (not bad)

0 to 80 mph (Time required to accelerate from 0 to 80. Good measure of “street” acceleration): 6.97

Quarter Mile Sec (Time required to run the ¼ mile. Note! This is an idealized ¼ mile run with perfect rider technique AND shift times = zero seconds, in order to show effects of pure gearing changes with no rider technique variables. An actual ¼ mile run would be slower): 13.21

Top speed: 124 (IF the stock bike is actually 5 to 7 hp weaker & does 119, you should do 124 under ideal conditions)

RPM at top speed (measure of how ideally the bike is geared for top speed specifically): 6227

Maximum Gs (maximum acceleration rate achieved): 0.79g (ok but not great)

Avg HP avail 0 – 100 (Average power available in accelerating hard 0 to 100 MPH): 51

RPM at 80 MPH (How high does the engine need to rev at 80 MPH cruising in top gear with this gearing): 4018 (ridiculously low for this engine – no wonder you use 3^rd and 4^th instead!)

Crawl speed (Lowest speed in 1st gear without engine discomfort – let’s you avoid using clutch slipping): 16

HP available at different speeds in top gear (power available without downshifting): Examine & compare the rightmost table on each data page! See how re-gearing makes a BIG difference. Note that with stock gearing, at 80 mph in top gear you have 43 horsepower without a downshift.

How to interpret the “Actual versus Ideal Force” Graph:

This graph compares your actual gearing to “perfect” gearing that would have your engine operating at its peak power rpm no matter what the road speed is.

The lightweight curved line represents the perfect gearing. It is truncated at low speeds because your tire can only transmit so much force before it starts to slip instead of grip. Any force above this truncated line is superfluous at these speeds.

The heavier line represents your actual gearing. You can never make it “perfect” unless you have an infinitely variable transmission. The sharp drops in this line represent shift points where you shift into the next higher gear because it provides more force at that speed than the previous gear. The force at each such point is well below the perfect line because your engine rpm has dropped as a result of the shift. However, if you had not shifted, it would be lower yet. Our computer software calculates the best shift point automatically.

At really low speeds, the thick (actual) line is well below the thin (perfect) line, because you are running at low rpm in 1^st gear. You can raise the actual force to the traction limit by slipping the clutch as you apply lots of throttle, but that wears your clutch quickly and introduces a dangerous lack of control for street use. A drag racer would use this technique to overcome the “hole” in tractive force at low speed.

The thick line goes horizontal at the speed at which your bike’s available power is no longer high enough to allow the bike to accelerate (i.e. your top speed), or when you bump into the rev limiter.

The big “hole” or “gap” right after the shift to 2^nd gear is normal for virtually any bike. The motorcycle designer tries to keep the top few gears close together, while giving you a low enough first gear to get rolling from a dead stop where power from the engine is very limited, and you take the hit on that 1^st to 2^nd shift.

In your case, note the following:

The gearing for 2 throgh 5^th is really excellent at keeping you right at the theoretical limit line. However, your tractive force is very weak in 1^st gear - nowhere NEAR the traction limit, so don’t worry about breaking the rear tire loose under clean and dry road conditions. Your 1^st to 2^nd gap is pretty normal. I would like to move it to a lower mph range, so that its impact on acceleration is lessened (the air drag forces at lower speeds are MUCH lower, and therefore the bike can pull its way through the gap easier).

Pages 7 & 8: 35/8 Gearing

This is a surprising amount better performance, given the relatively small percentage change in gearing ratio!

RPM at 60 mph: 3196 (still very modest)

HP @ 60 mph: 34 (6% better than stock)

0 to 80 mph: 6.72 (0.25 second and 3.5% better than stock)

Quarter Mile Sec: 13.01 (0.20 sec better than stock)

Top speed: 123 (lose 1 mph)

RPM at top speed: 6551

Maximum Gs: 0.85 (8% better!)

Avg HP avail 0 – 100 mph: 52 (tiny bit better)

RPM at 80 MPH: 4261 (still VERY low)

Crawl speed: 15

HP available at different speeds in top gear: Now have 48 versus 43 hp at 80 mph – 12% more!

Tractive force graph:

The gap has been moved to a lower speed range where the bike can pull through it a little easier. Not enough though; we can do more with one of the other gearing combinations.

Pages 8 & 9: 37/8 Gearing

This is quite good from an improvement perspective. Some BIG gains in real world useful performance. And, close enough to 33/7 below to make it a viable option if available at a good deal price compared to 33/7.

RPM at 60 mph: 3378 (still very modest for this engine)

HP @ 60 mph: 35 (over 9% better than stock)

0 to 80 mph: 6.49 (7% better than stock)

Quarter Mile Sec: 12.84 (This is a stunning 0.37 sec quicker than stock!)

Top speed: 121 (lost 3 mph versus stock)

RPM at top speed: 6800 (I set the software to treat 6800 as the rev limit, since that is where the dyno cut it too)

Maximum Gs: 0.90 (14% better than stock – you would really feel this improvement!)

Avg HP avail 0 – 100 mph: 53 (4% better than tock)

RPM at 80 MPH: 4505 (still VERY low, but at least better)

Crawl speed: 15 (very attractively low. No clutch slipping required at low speeds around town)

HP available at different speeds in top gear: Note that you now have 52 vs 43 hp at 80 mph – 21% more

Tractive force graph:

The curve is actually starting to get at least nearer the traxction limit in 1 st gear, and the gap has moved further down the speed range.

Pages 10 & 11: 33/7 Gearing

THIS is the best option I think, especially for someone like you who rarely goes really fast on the highway.

RPM at 60 mph: 3444 (This is getting towards respectable!)

HP @ 60 mph: 36 (12.5% better than stock, and comparable to other big bore bikes)

0 to 80 mph: 6.43 (8% better than stock)

Quarter Mile Sec: 12.79 (This is a fabulous 0.42 sec faster than stock. That’s HUGE)

Top speed: 119 (loss of 5 mph)

RPM at top speed: rev limit

Maximum Gs: 0.92 (16.5% better than stock!!!)

Avg HP avail 0 – 100 mph: 53

RPM at 80 MPH: 4591 (still ridiculously low for your needs, but acceptable)

Crawl speed: 14 (THIS is GOOD!)

HP available at different speeds in top gear: Now 54 vs 43 hp at 80 mph – 26% better than stock!

Tractive force graph:

Well, we’ll evidently NEVER break traction with this bike, but we gave it a good try! And, the gap is now at lower mph yet, reducing the effort the engine needs to make to break through it.

Caution! Caution! Caution!

Any gearing change that improves acceleration and response also increases tendency of the bike to wheelie. Unicycles do not steer well and do not brake at all well, as most of your braking ability comes from the front wheel.

A re-geared bike can also break traction easier, as there is more torque being applied between the tire and the road surface. This is especially possible when the road is wet or has dirt on it.

If you implement any of these gearing changes, be very careful in where and under what conditions you apply throttle either suddenly or greatly!!

Ride carefully, as you are irreplaceable, and you would be missed.

Jim G

2002 Moto Guzzi Stone
Data Used:
Rider weight	170
Vehicle weight	555	with 2 gal gas
Weight totalbefore mods	725
Total modded weight	725
Power factor used	1.00
software version	1s
Final ratio	4.125
Rear sprocket:	33	Front:	8
Modifications:
Item	Modded?		Inertia effect?
Rear wheel	No		No
Frint wheel	No		No
Sprocket	No		No
Chain	No		No
Clutch	No		No
Flywheel	No		No
Front brake rotors	No		No
Rear brake rotors	No		No
Other	No		No
Ttoal diff in weight	0.0
								HP available at different
Calculated Results:								speeds in top gear
RPM @ 60 MPH in top gear		3013		Maximum Gs			0.79	HP @ 45	16
HP @ 60 MPH in top gear		32		Avg HPavail 0-60			41	HP @ 50	24
0 to 30 MPH		2.43		Avg Hpavail 60-100			66	HP @ 55	28
0 to 45 MPH		3.33		Avg Hpavail 0-100			51	HP @ 60	32
0 to 60 MPH		4.56						HP @ 65	34
0 to 80 MPH		6.97		Avg Hpavail = average available				HP @ 70	37
0 to 100 MPH		11.14		horsepower in the speed range given.				HP @ 80	43
Quarter Mile Sec		13.21						HP @ 90	52
Quarter Mile MPH		106		Gear at top speed			5	HP @ 100	61
Top Speed		124		RPM at top speed			6227	HP @110	66
	Actual Speed vs RPM in Each Gear
		Gear
		1	2	3	4	5	6	Crawl mph:	16
MPH	10	1339	930	701	582	502	502
	20	2678	1860	1403	1165	1004	1004
	30	4018	2790	2104	1747	1507	1507
	40	5357	3720	2806	2329	2009	2009
	50	6696	4650	3507	2911	2511	2511
	60		5580	4209	3494	3013	3013
	70		6510	4910	4076	3515	3515
	80			5612	4658	4018	4018
	90			6313	5240	4520	4520
	100				5823	5022	5022
	110				6405	5524	5524
	120					6026	6026
	130					6528	6528
	140
	150
	160
	170
	180

2002 Moto Guzzi Stone
Data Used:
Rider weight	170
Vehicle weight	555	with 2 gal gas
Weight totalbefore mods	725
Total modded weight	725
Power factor used	1.00
software version	1s
Final ratio	4.375
Rear sprocket:	35	Front:	8
Modifications:
Item	Modded?		Inertia effect?
Rear wheel	No		No
Frint wheel	No		No
Sprocket	No		No
Chain	No		No
Clutch	No		No
Flywheel	No		No
Front brake rotors	No		No
Rear brake rotors	No		No
Other	No		No
Ttoal diff in weight	0.0
								HP available at different
Calculated Results:								speeds in top gear
RPM @ 60 MPH in top gear		3196		Maximum Gs			0.85	HP @ 45	20
HP @ 60 MPH in top gear		34		Avg HPavail 0-60			43	HP @ 50	26
0 to 30 MPH		2.24		Avg Hpavail 60-100			66	HP @ 55	31
0 to 45 MPH		3.09		Avg Hpavail 0-100			52	HP @ 60	34
0 to 60 MPH		4.31						HP @ 65	36
0 to 80 MPH		6.72		Avg Hpavail = average available				HP @ 70	39
0 to 100 MPH		10.87		horsepower in the speed range given.				HP @ 80	48
Quarter Mile Sec		13.01						HP @ 90	57
Quarter Mile MPH		106		Gear at top speed			5	HP @ 100	64
Top Speed		123		RPM at top speed			6551	HP @110	66
	Actual Speed vs RPM in Each Gear
		Gear
		1	2	3	4	5	6	Crawl mph:	15
MPH	10	1420	986	744	618	533	533
	20	2841	1973	1488	1235	1065	1065
	30	4261	2959	2232	1853	1598	1598
	40	5681	3945	2976	2470	2131	2131
	50		4932	3720	3088	2663	2663
	60		5918	4464	3705	3196	3196
	70			5208	4323	3728	3728
	80			5952	4940	4261	4261
	90			6696	5558	4794	4794
	100				6175	5326	5326
	110				6793	5859	5859
	120					6392	6392
	130
	140
	150
	160
	170
	180

2002 Moto Guzzi Stone
Data Used:
Rider weight	170
Vehicle weight	555	with 2 gal gas
Weight totalbefore mods	725
Total modded weight	725
Power factor used	1.00
software version	1s
Final ratio	4.625
Rear sprocket:	37	Front:	8
Modifications:
Item	Modded?		Inertia effect?
Rear wheel	No		No
Frint wheel	No		No
Sprocket	No		No
Chain	No		No
Clutch	No		No
Flywheel	No		No
Front brake rotors	No		No
Rear brake rotors	No		No
Other	No		No
Ttoal diff in weight	0.0
								HP available at different
Calculated Results:								speeds in top gear
RPM @ 60 MPH in top gear		3378		Maximum Gs			0.90	HP @ 45	24
HP @ 60 MPH in top gear		35		Avg HPavail 0-60			44	HP @ 50	29
0 to 30 MPH		2.07		Avg Hpavail 60-100			66	HP @ 55	33
0 to 45 MPH		2.89		Avg Hpavail 0-100			53	HP @ 60	35
0 to 60 MPH		4.09						HP @ 65	38
0 to 80 MPH		6.49		Avg Hpavail = average available				HP @ 70	42
0 to 100 MPH		10.65		horsepower in the speed range given.				HP @ 80	52
Quarter Mile Sec		12.84						HP @ 90	61
Quarter Mile MPH		106		Gear at top speed			5	HP @ 100	66
Top Speed		121		RPM at top speed			6800	HP @110	66
	Actual Speed vs RPM in Each Gear
		Gear
		1	2	3	4	5	6	Crawl mph:	15
MPH	10	1502	1043	787	653	563	563
	20	3003	2085	1573	1306	1126	1126
	30	4505	3128	2360	1958	1689	1689
	40	6006	4171	3146	2611	2252	2252
	50		5214	3933	3264	2815	2815
	60		6256	4719	3917	3378	3378
	70			5506	4570	3941	3941
	80			6292	5223	4505	4505
	90				5875	5068	5068
	100				6528	5631	5631
	110					6194	6194
	120					6757	6757
	130
	140
	150
	160
	170
	180

2002 Moto Guzzi Stone
Data Used:
Rider weight	170
Vehicle weight	555	with 2 gal gas
Weight totalbefore mods	725
Total modded weight	725
Power factor used	1.00
software version	1s
Final ratio	4.714
Rear sprocket:	33	Front:	7
Modifications:
Item	Modded?		Inertia effect?
Rear wheel	No		No
Frint wheel	No		No
Sprocket	No		No
Chain	No		No
Clutch	No		No
Flywheel	No		No
Front brake rotors	No		No
Rear brake rotors	No		No
Other	No		No
Ttoal diff in weight	0.0
								HP available at different
Calculated Results:								speeds in top gear
RPM @ 60 MPH in top gear		3444		Maximum Gs			0.92	HP @ 45	25
HP @ 60 MPH in top gear		36		Avg HPavail 0-60			44	HP @ 50	30
0 to 30 MPH		2.02		Avg Hpavail 60-100			66	HP @ 55	34
0 to 45 MPH		2.83		Avg Hpavail 0-100			53	HP @ 60	36
0 to 60 MPH		4.03						HP @ 65	39
0 to 80 MPH		6.43		Avg Hpavail = average available				HP @ 70	43
0 to 100 MPH		10.59		horsepower in the speed range given.				HP @ 80	54
Quarter Mile Sec		12.79						HP @ 90	62
Quarter Mile MPH		106		Gear at top speed			5	HP @ 100	66
Top Speed		119		RPM at top speed			6800	HP @110	66
	Actual Speed vs RPM in Each Gear
		Gear
		1	2	3	4	5	6	Crawl mph:	14
MPH	10	1530	1063	802	665	574	574
	20	3061	2126	1603	1331	1148	1148
	30	4591	3189	2405	1996	1722	1722
	40	6122	4251	3207	2662	2296	2296
	50		5314	4008	3327	2870	2870
	60		6377	4810	3993	3444	3444
	70			5612	4658	4018	4018
	80			6413	5323	4591	4591
	90				5989	5165	5165
	100				6654	5739	5739
	110					6313	6313
	120
	130
	140
	150
	160
	170
	180