www.boxertrix.com

Had a chance to ride my brothers prestine 34 years old MK I Guzzi Le Mans today for the first (and last) time.

Considering this was 'The' twin sports bike of its day all I can say is twins (and especially brakes ) have come a mightly long way (thank heavens).


Yours truly aboard the beast (its bloody tiny compared to the HP)

My brother also had a go on my HP2 at the same time and while he was more than impressed by engine and brakes, his overriding memory was one of aching wrists (after about 2 miles) He's more of a touring bike rider (Pans, Goldwings, etc) so the sporty riding position was a bit errrrr.....extreme

Anyway. Can't say I'll be shelling out £11K+ for a secondhand Mk I Guzzi anytime soon (ever) but it was interesting to have a go.


The old and the new.


DT

Nice pics Greg, I have lusted after one of those lemons since i was 18, never ridden one, and everyone i know who has either owned one or ridden one has said the same as you, wouldn't put me off if my lottery numbers came up though

Steve

Looks to be in 'good nick' tho but.

Boxered wrote:Nice pics Greg, I have lusted after one of those lemons since i was 18, never ridden one, and everyone i know who has either owned one or ridden one has said the same as you, wouldn't put me off if my lottery numbers came up though

Steve

The trouble is it looks like it ought to ride really well but the reality is very different. Really odd riding position (although not very wristy?), bars really narrow, can't see the top half of the clocks (and there is no useful information on the bit of the clocks you can see), the side stand puts itself up and is so far forward that you can't put it down whilesitting on the bike, it has two fuel taps (whatever they are?), you have to turn the throttle to start it?, the gearbox has a neutral between ever gear (and I found averyone of them), the engine revs to about 6K max (never went anywhere near it bro....honest),
and the brakes are shocking. I asked my bro what the brakes were like before we set off " really good" say he so we set off. First traffic island and I pull on the brakes with one finger (as per HP2). Nothing Slight brown trouser moment until got four fingers on the lever and gave it a firm squeeze. What bro failed to add was "considering they are 34 years old"
Positives were the way it made you feel riding a shiny 34 year old bike (2 owners from news and the last one for 32 years!) and the engine sounded and felt great. It's not got much power but the way it vibrated as the revs built was brill.

Would I buy one? definately NO!. Do I have smile on my face as one chugs past? Most definately YES.

Ride before you buy!!

DT

It is a lovely example, but years ago I rode one of these, lent to me by a friend and, on the same day I also rode another 'across-the-frame' 'V' twin, a Honda CX 500. Got to be said, I had no desire to ever ride another 'Guzzi' but I realy liked the Honda and thought it a very under-rated bike.

Dog Tyred wrote:
The trouble is it looks like it ought to ride really well but the reality is very different. Really odd riding position (although not very wristy?), bars really narrow, can't see the top half of the clocks (and there is no useful information on the bit of the clocks you can see), the side stand puts itself up and is so far forward that you can't put it down whilesitting on the bike, it has two fuel taps (whatever they are?), you have to turn the throttle to start it?,

Mmmm Mr Gray

Dog Tyred wrote: the gearbox has a neutral between ever gear (and I found averyone of them), the engine revs to about 6K max (never went anywhere near it bro....honest),
and the brakes are shocking.

Oh Please Stop

Dog Tyred wrote:
the engine sounded and felt great. It's not got much power but the way it vibrated as the revs built was brill.

Ok, I’m done….tissue please


Steve

Boxered wrote:

Dog Tyred wrote:
The trouble is it looks like it ought to ride really well but the reality is very different. Really odd riding position (although not very wristy?), bars really narrow, can't see the top half of the clocks (and there is no useful information on the bit of the clocks you can see), the side stand puts itself up and is so far forward that you can't put it down whilesitting on the bike, it has two fuel taps (whatever they are?), you have to turn the throttle to start it?,

Mmmm Mr Gray

Dog Tyred wrote: the gearbox has a neutral between ever gear (and I found averyone of them), the engine revs to about 6K max (never went anywhere near it bro....honest),
and the brakes are shocking.

Oh Please Stop

Dog Tyred wrote:
the engine sounded and felt great. It's not got much power but the way it vibrated as the revs built was brill.

Ok, I’m done….tissue please


Steve

Let 'em try movin that to 'Humour' tho.

Le Mans was the first big bike I rode - loved it but after a CB250N(ightmare) anything was great!!! Especially liked the Mk 11 black and gold version

BTW, Wots goin on with the underseat zorst on the BM? Is it going rusty

Lovely looking bike. I had a (not as nice looking) mk.4 for a (short) time. The brakes are actually quite good, bearing in mind the age, but you have to use the rear brake as much as the front because of the silly/brilliant (delete as applicable) linked brake system. The front brake alone is, as you say, a bit nerve wracking! They do go well but by all accounts the carburation doesn't like towns or slow speed stuff, and the throttle has a loooooong action, so they only really work well on fast sweeping A-roads.

Still looks stunning though! And they sound marvellous.