| The overhaul of the LM2 came to conclusion wiith the first successfull
10.000km in 2003 (the disappointing Minardi
action at the ring of Antwerp, was a not related incident). This gave
time and "budget" to the original plan to make a cafe-racer of the LM3.
Usually a cafe racer is 70% smuck and 15% story and 15% improvement (because
the unnecessary parts are removed). And of course I should have sticked
to this concept. But since I had been riding on the Sport 1100 of a friend
I figured a better front fork and parallel rear are really making sence,
so ..
I bought a Giovane F.I.T. rear suspension
This system comes relatively close to the parallel swinger of the Sport
1100, with this difference that it is still a stereo shock bridge.
Apart from having a parallel swing-arm, the advantage of this rear
swing is more space for a 160/60 R18 tyre, in order to have the same tyre
size as the Sport 1100 (With a lot of hassle as I experienced later).
All that was left now was a good front fork. I ran into a standard
Daytona front complet with Brembo four cylinder gold lines, so this would
mean a further improved front.
The swing is not exactly parallel. This leaves a little of the cardan-effect.
Because of this it is possible to use shocks with a bit over-length ( I
have 20-30 mm over-length) The more the spring compresses, in my configuration,
the more the axles are becoming parallel.
The hype for modern Superbikes is not so much the weight, but even more
the weight concentration. This is interesting because on this point I scored
on several points
-
Lighter rims (both around 1 kg, but this is an estimate because the tyres
were on theLM3 rims)
-
Lighter rear swing (several kilo's)
-
Frame tubes behind the shock connection will be cut-off
-
Battery from 32 Ah to 9 Ah (ca. 9 kg to 3.4 kg)
A furter improvement will be a standard Valeo starter vor the Guzzi'e.
This starter requires only a 9Ah battery and the type from Yuasha is only
2.4 kg in stead of the 8.8 - 10.2 kg of the 32Ah battery. Also the Valeo
is lighter than the Bosch starter
The final weight reduction (measured)
| part |
original
[kg] |
modified
[kg] |
| front-fork complete |
29 |
29.2 |
| rear fork complete |
32 |
30.2 |
| battery |
10.2 |
2.4 |
| startermotor |
4.0 |
2.8 |
| frame parts and centre stand |
3.5 |
- |
| Seat and rear-end |
3.5 |
1.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weight reduction in total of this part of the job is,
16.1 kg
The weight is devided as front/rear = 102/108 kg/kg
My good old LM2 is devided at front/rear = 95/130
I think the LM2 has an advantage because of the smaller tank. Both bikes
were measured with a full tank. Further the wheelbase of the LM3 is longer
and in my case the longer rear shock bring weight to the front (only very
little of course)
|