MotorcycleDaily.com – Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Motorcycle News, Editorials, Product Reviews and Bike Reviews

Moto Guzzi Introduces New 850cc V7

Moto Guzzi calls it a V7, plain and simple, not a V7 IV. This isn’t merely an evolution of the prior models, but an all-new bike with a much larger 850cc v-twin evolved from the V85 TT adventure model.

Horsepower and torque are up significantly, although this still is no drag racer. Two versions are available, including the Stone with cast wheels and the Special with spoked wheels. Several other changes are described, with all the details, in the following press release:

  • AFTER YEARS OF SUCCESS, A NEW V7 IS BORN
  • THE NEW, HIGH-PERFORMANCE, 850CC, 65 HP ENGINE MAKES ITS DEBUT
  • 2021 V7 IS FASTER, MORE COMFORTABLE, BETTER EQUIPPED AND REFINED, MAINTAINING ALL THE CHARACTER AND AUTHENTICITY THAT EVERY MOTO GUZZI BOASTS

More than fifty years after the launch of its first unit, Moto Guzzi is proud to present a new and important evolution in the history of the V7, a prominent symbol of Italian motorbikes around the world.

The revamping is so profound that the progressive numbering in Roman numerals, which had characterized the various evolutions of the model since its return to the market in 2007, is gone. But the character and authenticity remain intact, as these values are destined to last over time and embedded in the genetic code of every Moto Guzzi.

Two versions are available: the patriarch, V7 Stone, with its strong and minimalistic style, is joined by the V7 Special, with its classic and elegant lines.

A new Moto Guzzi engine makes its début on the new V7, a close derivative of the one that powers the V85 TT. This is the most recent and modern drive built in Mandello, which guarantees better performance and overall greater efficiency in order to provide maximum riding pleasure, fun and reliability.

It has 25% more maximum power, going from the previous 52 hp at 6,200 rpm to the current 65 hp at 6,800 rpm. Maximum torque has also increased significantly, going from 60 Nm at 4250 rpm to the outstanding value of 73 Nm at 5,000 rpm, with more than 80% of the torque already available at 3,000 rpm.

Compared to the previous version, the new addition from Mandello is generally more complete in terms of equipment and demonstrates superior maturity, also evident in the aesthetic impact of the larger engine, which stands out for its generously sized exhaust pipes in a different layout; the view from the rear highlights the larger cardan final drive and the wider rear wheel, as well as the more robust pair of Kayaba shock absorbers.

The stylish side panels are new, as is the shorter rear mudguard, elements which, along with the new exhaust system, give the new ‘eight and a half’ a revamped and more seductive look.

Many new features have been introduced to improve stability and comfort, leaving the proverbial handling of the Moto Guzzi best-seller unaltered.

The frame has been evolved with the addition of steel elements in the headstock area, whereas the new pair of shock absorbers with greater travel and the new, two-tier saddle ensure greater comfort. With this same goal in mind, brand new rider foot peg supports are used.

Moto Guzzi V7 Stone has the new, full LED light system with the headlight that includes a DRL in the shape of the Moto Guzzi Eagle, whereas the new instrument cluster is perfectly in line with the look of a minimalist motorcycle, entirely digital on a single, circular dial. The aluminum wheels, in the sporty style that equips the Stone, are also new; the rear rim is shod with a wider 150/70 tire.

V7 Special maintains the elegant, dual dial analogue instrument cluster (speedometer and rev counter) and the ultra-classic spoked wheels.

V7 Stone is available in three satin-finish color schemes: Nero Ruvido, Azzurro Ghiaccio and Arancione Rame. The color variants of the V7 Special, the version closes to the classic and elegant spirit of the original model, are Blu Formale and Grigio Casual.

143 Comments

  1. benzeno says:

    Stone is tubeless.
    You can adjust the valves at home in 30 minutes.
    Shaft drive is mostly maintenance free.
    V7 III gets over 50 mpg.
    Added sintered pads and a fork kit.

    Can’t beat it for commuting.
    Looks great at bike night.

  2. Reginald Van Blunt says:

    Just looked at the MSRP for the Stone, on Total Motorcycle, and was shocked like 120 volts on the end of the nose. $ 18,290 . Are they kidding ?
    Whoo Chi Momma, there is gonna be a lota less dealerships inna the future. This is not a performance bike. Gotta be a mistake.

  3. todder says:

    Tubeless wheels would have been a great improvement to one up the Triumph Bonneville models.

  4. joe b says:

    I understand how some loyal Guzzi owners will like this. A big jump in HP to now 65HP! and it has torque, where most people just want it cruising mid range. I also read all the comments about the Monster, just a story or 2 back, and it was 111HP, not 65HP, and 365 lbs, not 460 lbs, and it just got hammered because they didn’t like the look. I must be old. Remember when the bike that was the fastest and lightest won the shootout? Or am i the only one. ?

    • Marcus says:

      I think the new Ducati is a fine, powerful, light weight bike. It’s just that they shouldn’t have called it a “Monster”.
      It’s like when Pontiac came out with the new “GTO” around 2004. It had the name badge but it wasn’t a “GTO”. I don’t know what it was but it wasn’t a GTO.
      Or when Yamaha made the Seka 2.

      But truth be told, I’m already tired of looking at this MG. It’s underpowered and has tubed tires. Sure, you love spoked rims but try getting a puncture in the middle of nowhere.
      Prediction- Your next bike has cast wheels.

    • mickey says:

      Ducati Monster and Guzzi special will have different buyers.

      As far as fastest lightest shootout…. in 2005 I read a 5 bike Sport Touring shootout. BMW R1200RT, FJR 1300, Triumph Sprint ST, Honda ST 1300, Kawasaki Concours

      Anyhow the FJR was the fastest, the BMW the lightest (and won the shootout if I recall), but the one I bought after reading the shootout was the Honda ST 1300. It was the heaviest and slowest, but rated the most comfortable for rider and passenger and had the best wind protection. The properties I was looking for. I put 110,000 miles on it with my wife crossing the country several times. It was a great motorcycle even though it lost the shoot out. I was never disappointed with my choice.

      Fastest and lightest doesn’t necessarily translate to the best choice for each rider.

      • Jeremy says:

        The ST1300 was a great bike. To this day, I don’t think I’ve ridden anything more comfortable. I personally thought it was best in class for comfort and refinement in a fast package.

    • bad Chad says:

      I hear what your saying Joe. But back when the horsepower wars begain in the 70s, 65hp was considered a lot! If someone wants they can get into all kinds of trouble with ease sitting on 65hp! Today, ultra powerfull motors have so much more power that they can’t possibly be ridden anywhere near their limits on public road. They are loaded with electronic assistants just so the average rider can keep it in the lane.

      You can by a number of 400 pound bikes with over 200hp. At some point, a point which I think we have passed, (can’t believe I would ever say that) it just becomes stupid. But back to your point, I remeber those days, it was a fantastic time to be a young and into motorcycles!!

      • mickey says:

        as long as y’all remember the quoted 65 HP on this bike is at the crank..or a little over 50 at the rear wheel. This MG is just slightly more powerful than a CB500X and not nearly as powerful as an SV650 or MT-07

        If they had put the 79(crank)hp motor of the V85 in it, it would be a lot better (then it would be close to 65 rwhp.)

        • bad Chad says:

          First off, all MFG quote hp figures at the crank, its been that way for years. So the old v7 made 52hp, and the new one makes 65, for a net gain of 13hp. Typically driveshafts consume 10-15% of that power to get it to the road. So if we take 13% of the hp for driveshaft loss that still puts about 57hp at the wheel.
          Although it is of some note that the2017-20 V7III are quoted at 52hp, but consistently produce around 48hp at the wheel, a 7-8% loss, & Guzzi v9 is even more so, quoted at 55hp at the crank, but all published dyno records show rear wheel hp in the 51-53 range, a loss of only in the 5% range. If that countinues through to the new v7 850 actuall usable hp will be around 60-61. HP published figures taken from Rider.com and Motorcycle.com

    • arbuz says:

      It probably depends what ‘specs’ you are considering.
      Seems like folks in Guzzi camp, have in mind different specs than in the Monster camp.

      Shaft drive, lower standard seat height.
      Ease of self-maintanence.

      But at the end I agree with you, that it is actually easier for Ducati to make a Guzzle-like looking bike.

      Than for Guzzi to make a Ducatti-like performing bike.

      So technically, Ducatti monster is a more accomplished bike from an engineering perspective.

  5. Kermit The Frog says:

    I tried to post this earlier but failed. Hopefully I can succeed this time.

    I am the target for this bike but there is no way I will buy it with a single rotor up front or tubed wheels. I am a seasoned citizen (read: OLD!!) and have a handicap that prevents me from using a rear brake, ergo I desire as much braking power as can be afforded via the right brake lever, including ABS. My current bike has no ABS and a single rotor. Unlike a great many riders in SoCal, I obey the speed limits and never split lanes. It may be “legal” but as it is practiced (and I witness it every day of the week) by the majority of riders, it is stupid dangerous.

    My handicap is the reason I have looked at the Kymco AK550 and the Pigaggio Mp3 for new mounts. This version of the V7 is pretty much nothing more than larger engine (and rear drive) rendition of the previous V7s of the last few years and there really is nothing wrong with that.

    Basically Guzzi has taken a V9 motor and put a bigger tank on it. A person in the Los Angeles area had a similar V9 with the V7 tank on it for sale on Craigslist a while back. It makes sense. The tank on the V9s was too small to go any distance without worrying about range. But it too had a single rotor up front.

    I have great difficulty getting low enough to physically change a tire let alone a tubed one but I can and have plugged a puncture and continued on my way. This along with the puberty inducing tank-slappers that a blow-out often brings are two big reasons I HATE tubes in wheels. 🙂 You feel otherwise? Fine. You buy a bike with tubes and I will be happy for you, LOL!

    So then. In my mind, Guzzi blew it with the V85 by sticking it with tubes and now with this new V7 they have given it tubes and a single front disc or tubeless and a single rotor up front.

    Until I find what I not only want but need in a bike, I shall just keep what I have and wait. And wait…and wait. 😉

    Geeze, Guzzi…Don’t you EVER READ THIS SITE?! 😉

    • todd says:

      To your point, Guzzi blew it with YOU and some other people that base their motorcycle buying decisions on how the air is held in the tire. For people who are customers, it’s fine. I used to complain that car and truck manufacturers are dropping manual transmissions. Then I remembered that they don’t care if I (or others like me) won’t buy their vehicles because of it, they’ll just sell to the people who don’t care either way.

      • Kemit T Frog says:

        My point is backed with reasons that are valid for me, i.e., physical handicaps. Several ears ago I read where 75% of all new vehicles were sold with automatics.

        I used to drive a manual but then I was hurt in an accident (NOT vehicle related) and coud no longer do so. I can still shift a motorcycle, I can no longer use a rear brake pedal. When repairing/changing a tire, once on the ground I am something of a turtle on its back, LOL! I can get back up again it just takes a lot of hilarious looking effort. And some time… 😉

        I offer my reasons. I so often read here of how a bike is “too heavy” or doesn’t have “enough power”. Prior to my injury and especially so when I was younger, I could lift my Enduros to waist height and even carry them for several feet (no…NOT on my shoulders, LOL!). No brag. Just fact.

        But a motorycles isn’t meant to be carried and sometimes weight is on your side (touring) but I understand why a rational person would desire less weight, it’s just that so many here are anything but rational and again, that is why I gave sound reasons for what I want and need in a motorcycle.

        A large fuel tank for range. Tubeless wheels for safety and convenience. Dual discs up front with ABS for maximum safe braking power when all I CAN use is the front lever.

        To MY mind, Guzzi blew it. Again. FYI – “in my mind” does indeed mean, “for me”. 🙂

        It is not just Guzzi. 🙂 But I would like a Guzzi one day before I am unable to ride any more.

    • TimC says:

      I quit reading with your crap about lane-splitting. Whatever.

  6. Anonymous says:

    The Special is just a V7 III Special with the V9 motor and the story is the same with the new V7 Stone but the speedo is digital.

    Pass.

    And I like Guzzis but this ain’t enough of an upgrade in the braking and wheels department. I get what people are saying regarding power and I’m fine with their comments on both sides of the coin. For me, stopping is important and I can only use the front brake due to an injury/handicp so I not only want but need as much power from the front brake as I can get and dual discs (with ABS) can deliver that for ME.

    Same with my need for tubeless wheels. I can’t patch a tire on the road but I can and have plug a hole and continue on my way.

  7. pedro says:

    The charm factor is waning – this is a botch job. Why “update” something to a new state of old – no-one buys this for performance – they’re mostly a scooter swap for a sportier look. Why not spend some R&D money and produce a decent modern bike. If I was to get a retro air-cooled bike for some obscure reason, it would be an RE 650 twin. Seems an honest machine at a fair price. Guzzi used to try – at least a few decades ago.

  8. DR007 says:

    Ok, where do I sign. I don’t need convincing when it comes to a Moto Guzzi.

  9. FREDDIE says:

    I am glad to see someone still knows what a motorcycle should look like, as for the hp it has more than half of the riders making comments need.

    • todd says:

      More than half what I need? Fine praise. Fine praise indeed.

      • John A. Kuzmenko says:

        That line is missing a what.
        It should read:
        …has more than what half of the riders making comments need.

        Personally, the bike reminds me of the 1978 Honda CX500.

        • mickey says:

          I think FREDDIE’S statement was right the first time lol

          This has about 51 rwhp I need about 100 rwhp to make me happy, so it has about half of what I need.

          See, he was right.

  10. MG3 says:

    The new V7 Special is, IMHO, a nearly flawless execution of a mid-sized motorcycle design. It is ‘timeless’ and will look as good 30 years from now as it does sitting in a showroom today.

    The new 850 motor is not for everyone, but when I hear my brothers talking about ‘keeping up with traffic’, I often think some really mean to say ‘keeping ahead of traffic’. Unfortunately when riding in heavy traffic (Long Island, NY) my thoughts are to ‘stay alive’, not ‘have fun’. It’s the price I pay to continue riding with so many obnoxious and dangerous drivers hovering around me.

    There are many strategies for dealing with heavy urban and suburban traffic safely, and I endorse anything within reason that has kept you alive and riding. But if I tried to keep ahead of some of the drivers around these parts I’m sure I would have given up the game long ago, for one reason or another.

    My 2005 Guzzi 750 Nevada has the power to pull me out of just about any situation if I use the engine fully. But it also provides relaxed characteristics and comfort for ‘hiding in the right lane’ when that’s what I want to do.

    • Dave says:

      I always read the “keep up with traffic” comment from motorcyclists to mean, “I can effortlessly and instantly pass traffic at any speed and any time, enough to shock the people I’m passing, if I so desire.”.

    • mickey says:

      Staying safe is often a combo of riding defensively and offensively.

      • Dino says:

        The best Defense,is a good Offense..
        (Mel, the cook on Alice)

        Sometimes you find yourself in a crowd of idiots in traffic.. Either let them move ahead, or leave them far behind.. Ya need to have options! The Guzzi should have enough power for that.. Looks good, also!

      • Motoman says:

        When I was in the moto biz, I used to tell newbies it wasn’t enough to ride defensively. I used to say you must ride “offensively defensive”. Kept me alive for 50 years of riding and counting.

      • TimC says:

        Yeah a few months back here in CO a H-D rider got hit by a truck in some kind of road rage incident. It instantly occurred to me that a non-maneuverable bike that tops out at around 100 isn’t what I want to be on if I come across the wrong crazy….

    • Dirty Bob says:

      Almost bought a Guzzi in 2010. The California Classic (maybe 1100cc) looked nice. I was arranging to pick it up in Italy but overnight negotiations stopped. I was fed up with the factory. They raised the price couple of thousand dollars. I settled on a new Sportster 1200 with extras for less. Best choice I could make then added 45k to the odometer before trading it in for a big bike.

  11. Michael Johnson says:

    I definitely have had two Guzzi’s and this Special has me worried that my bank account is gonna take a serious hit !

  12. Bubba Blue says:

    I love Moto Guzzi and I’ve owned two, I think. I know 65 is plenty of HP for enjoyment. It’s just hard to imagine getting real satisfaction from that number. I’m sure I’m wrong.

    Great looking bike though. I’d love to have one.

    • mickey says:

      you THINK you’ve owned two? Bikes were that memorable huh? lol

    • TimC says:

      Satisfaction – depends on what you’re doing – 28 HP or whatever on a gen 1 Ninja 250 is plenty satisfying in serious twisties. Not so much in 80 MPH urban traffic, even if it can “keep up”….

  13. Grover says:

    About the only superfluous item on the bike is the ugly wing glued across the headlight. That I could easily do without. Not sure what the Italians think that it adds to the looks of the bike because it doesn’t. Other than that, I think it’s a well executed design.

    • todd says:

      The whole headlight on the Stone looks like a cheap Amazon plastic flashlight. I’m sure the wing shape was to give it more details to make it look fancy – because somehow “fancy” shaped plastic looks less cheap than basic plastic.

    • Nick says:

      Didn’t they say that that was an LED running light? That’s another quirky feature like the fork gaiters that is apparently left off the ‘Special’.

    • VLJ says:

      Yes, they’re saying the Guzzi eagle logo on the Stone is an LED DRL. It’s not just a useless piece of plastic.

      • Reginald Van Blunt says:

        A decorative item, which even if illuminated will decrease the headlamp reflector effectiveness. Looks like the Special does not have it.

        • todd says:

          THANK GOD

        • VLJ says:

          The Stone has an LED headlight, so its effectiveness will be determined not by the DRL but by the design of the LEDs. The Special has a small halogen headlight. In theory, at least, the Stone’s headlight should offer superior illumination.

          • Reginald Van Blunt says:

            Even with point source LEDs the reflector is most important in determining volume of light down the road. The shell sizes appear to be the same between the Special and the Stone, therefore until we can can do a look-see in person at a dealership, uncertain.
            Now the real problem is the lack of dealerships, 2 in my entire state.

  14. Reginald Van Blunt says:

    This is a sensible machine with the panache of a much more capable thumper. Smooth soul at high cruising speeds for extended periods of time with low rpm durability. I would buy one quick like a bunny IF, ( here comes my negative comment for the anti-negative commenters ) the foot controls were sized for an American foot. I like the single disk on a normal street bike, the dual exhaust for the depth of tonal quality, and semi flat seat (easily modified for flatter ). Sensible all.
    Regarding the handling, I had no problem with a Breva years ago, and very seldom motor thru a rippled surface decreasing radius curve way too fast for common sense.
    Shiny paint would be nice.

    • Scott 2E0OZI says:

      I’ve ridden a Breva for 16 years, and the Stone V7 could be the replacement for that bike. Still I wish they make a full fat modern 850 Breva…..

      • mickey says:

        16 years. I think that’s amazing. When I took a test ride on a Breva in 2003 I took off, gave it the gas and thought Whoa where’s the power? and then when I tried to stop I thought Whoa where’s the brakes?

        Bought a Triumph Bonneville instead, but only kept that 2 years as it needed a bit more power and brakes as well.

  15. Anonymous says:

    I like it. I think 65hp will get me down the road.

  16. Mick says:

    This bike seems to have passed the MD test. 66 comments and not one mention of a tank seam, tank capacity, or range.

    That’s high praise around these parts. There hasn’t even been that much whining about the power output on a bike that not only makes well below 100hp, but even makes less power than some single cylinder motorcycles on the market.

    Noted. You want to please the MD guys? Simply ignore all those terrible things that have happened over the years. You know what I’m talking about. The 80s, the 90s, the 2000s…

    • VLJ says:

      Scroll down the page. I enquired as to the tank capacity and wet weight. Others asked about the tranny: 5-spd or 6-spd?

      • Mick says:

        The V85 TT has six speeds. This one probably does too.

        Tank capacity is 5.5 gallons.

        The Italians don’t issue speeding tickets to non-residents. So most Italian bikes are going to have six speeds.

        Accommodating bunch.

  17. John says:

    Too bad looks and sound aren’t the only criteria for buying a bike.

  18. Rapier says:

    The new TT class engine was supposed to be able to be used as a stressed member or so I recall hearing. That would allow for many more styling options. Guess not. I’ve thought they have missed the mark for years on the V7 because they lack what the original had and I know because I owned one. A long low stretched look. Turns out as I just looked it up the original V7 Sports wheelbase was 58″. I would have sworn it was 60″. This one is 57″. Why not longer I have zero clue. It would looks so much better stretched out some.

    After two years since the TT I still don’t know where the oil tank is as the new engine is a dry sump. Or so was hinted at in one article, mentioned in passing. Sort of a big deal after 50 years. You would think somebody would mention it but no. That deep sump was sort of a downfall for packaging reasons of Guzzi’s so good riddance. If I owned Guzzi I would make water cooled forced induction in the same inline layout of course.

  19. joe b says:

    I was surprised to see the many raving comments about this bike, but its boring. heavy and slow. no excitement here. This is not the bike anyone would be looking for, move on.

    • Joe, you’re like school during summer vacation, no class.

      • joe b says:

        I realize, some people dont want performance. Some people dont mind a bike being overweight. Some people want something to look old, outdated. I can see that. Some people want a bike that is slow, because thats the only way they will ride it. my comment that this is not the bike anyone would be looking for, should have added, if you want a lightweight, modern looking bike, that has performance, and current features. I skipped class, and went out riding my bike, it was fast and light, and have not looked back.

        • If motorcycles can be seen as functional art (which is how many see them), this MG has ridiculous garage appeal. I’m sure my lowly Ninja 400 (current most fun winner in the garage) would destroy it in every objective metric..but next to this bike, it looks like a piece of plastic. If the wife allowed me to expand my stable, I would own this thing for that reason alone..

    • Rhinestone Kawboy says:

      Hey Joe, obviously there are more people than you think that are interested in this bike and brand. I think it is a very nice looking bike, and am liking some of the latest models that Guzzi is coming out with. If it’s too heavy, slow and boring to you, buy something else. A lot would rather have something more tame and easy to ride and live with.

    • Goose Lavel says:

      I agree with you Joe about the appearance of the bike and its unremarkable performance specs. I wouldn’t tell others to ignore it, but the one time I sat on a Guzzi, my legs rubbed against the cylinders and I figured that this wasn’t the moto for me.

  20. Jeremy says:

    Nice looking bike. The Special is getting a lot of love here, but I prefer the Stone. It’s a better interpretation of classic lines for modern times IMO.

    I remember sitting on a V7 III Racer at IMS. I thought is was a stunning bike, and it is the only motorcycle that has ever fit me like the proverbial glove right out of the box. I was pumped to test ride one and even told my wife there was going to be need for extra garage space when I got home. Man, what a disappointment that bike was. Irritatingly slow, unrefined, terrible brakes, terrible suspension, and a chassis so old-school noodly that throwing money at suspension and brakes would probably just make things worse. I was heartbroken.

    The old V7 needed so many things remedied, I can’t imagine they pulled it off here. Seeing that they remedied a pathetic powerplant by opting for a meager one doesn’t give me much hope.

    • todd says:

      Jeremy, it depends on your frame of reference – or what you expect out of the bike. If your last bike was a BSA Lightning, a R75, a Sportster or a CB360, this will feel like a great bike, very familiar and a beautiful upgrade. Yes, I see this as an improvement over thousands of different bikes that many people have slugged along on for the last 70 years.

      • Jeremy says:

        I don’t know if you are being serious or were intentionally presenting some witty humor, but it gave me a good chuckle either way. I agree it would be a great uograde to those bikes you mentioned. Let me get out my clay tablet and abacus and work out whether or not I can afford to put one in the garage right now.

        • todd says:

          In all sincerity, those are the sort of bikes you see scattered all over San Francisco.

          • Jeremy says:

            Having lived all over the U.S. save for the west coast, I’ve never seen those types of bikes in any number, not in the last 20 years anyway. I’ve only been to the Bay area a couple of times, though, so I’ll take your word for it. Still, any motorcycle save for maybe a Ural or a Royal Enfield would make a fine upgrade to those bikes.

      • newtonmetres says:

        like your comment-very true. all depends on what you have been riding-the bikes you mention make me think your around my vintage? I”m 67. youngsters wouldnt know what a R75 is or probably never heard of BSA

        • todd says:

          Thanks for the compliment but you’re much closer in age to my dad. Vintage bikes are very popular in SF, I’ve owned BSAs and four R75/5s. I also started reading Classic Bike as a kid in the ‘80s and really wanted to find and hotrod a Scott Flying Squirrel until the Yamaha SRX-6 came out. I had to wait quite a while to get old enough to ride one!

    • Dave says:

      Jere,y, all that stuff is what the retro crowd calls “character “ and “soul”.

      • mickey says:

        LOL yea…character

        that undefinable description that makes you wonder if you are going to make it home from your ride or if you’re gonna need a trailer to get it back in the garage

  21. todd says:

    Why does the Special lose the fork gaiters when the lower-spec stone gets to keep them? I guess people who pay more don’t care about rust pitting on the forks as much as people who prefer dull paint and plastic-looking wheels.

    • Nick says:

      Todd,

      It’s very refreshing to hear someone else point out the benefits of fork gaiters. They keep stones from chipping what is a precision part and also keep corrosive bits of squashed bug off, while reducing the need for tight dust seals. Often sneered at for being old-fashioned, they make a lot of sense. Naturally, I have them on several bikes, but I’m old too and appreciate their value. I’ve not got around to fitting them on USD forks but really ought to try it.

      • mickey says:

        About $100 and and an hours labor will get you the gaiters on the Special.

        I put gaiters on my CB 1100.

    • potomacduc says:

      I actually looked up dyno runs on the LeMans IV (same 949cc engine as the 1000S) and found results ranging from low 60s to low 70s, so taking the mid-point would give 65 hp at the rear wheel.

      The V85TT claims 80 hp, but actually makes 65-70 at the rear wheel on the dyno, so Moto Guzzi is getting the same power out of the 853cc engine that they got out of the 949cc 30 years earlier.

      It’s interesting that they claim 65 hp from this bike. Are they now using rwhp in their marketing or did they really lop off ~20% of the hp for this bike? Maybe that’s Euro 5?

      • Jeremy says:

        It looks like the engine is a derivative of the V85, in so much as the V9 is a derivative of the V85, by which I mean this is a 50 HP V9 engine.

  22. Tom Hepworth says:

    RELIABILITY IS A MAIN ISSUE WITH EKECTRICS BEING ANOTHER CONCERN.

    • Cagefree says:

      Is this comment from experience or just conjecture. I had the same misgivings when was I looking at buying my first Guzzi (13 Griso) but now after owning 3 modern Guzzis and putting on lots of miles I find them easy to service and very reliable. Im sure some have had issues but my experience has been better than I expected.

      • badChad says:

        I agree. I have had 3 modern Guzzi, all have been trouble free.

        • DeltaZulu says:

          I, too, am on my third M-G and all have proven very reliable and trouble-free. I currently have a Norge with over 60K miles and, other than normal maintenance and wear items, virtually no problems.
          I think some people just like to shoot their mouths off because they “heard” or imagined something about a particular brand, but have NO actual experience with it. I just ignore those idiots.

          • Stuki Moi says:

            But are they neglect-proof?

            Very few riders have the chops to service even “easy to service” bikes anymore. Those who do, no doubt benefit from a wider selection of models to feel confident about keeping trouble free.

            Not saying modern Guzzis aren’t. You rarely see them as messenger bikes, though. Nor in the second/third world rental fleets where lowest possible risk of failure and cost of keeping on the road, are paramount.

            Personally, IF they fit me (long femurs, short arms aren’t optimal for cylinders sticking out…..), I tend to really like the engines. 90 degree, air cooled V-twins tuned for low to midrange are really about as sweet as it gets, shy of 16000rpm screamers. 90 degree twins not cooking your crotch are even sweeter. And rarer. The old Le Mans was just marvelous, but I’m not sure if there’s enough space to keep my knees off the cylinder heads on an upright. I used to love the R1100S, yet struggle with the naked R….

            One thing about Guzzis: A test ride misrepresents them, and do them no favors. Just on account of them being different. In not long, you get used to their differentness. Then they no longer feel as awkward as they did at first. Yet still retain a certain specialness at normal speeds, which can often be lacking in bikes optimized for speeds 3x normal.

      • Bob Krzeszkiewicz says:

        Yep, my Stelvio NTX is dirt simple to maintain and reliable.

  23. Tim says:

    One of the best looking retro bikes any manufacturer has come up with to date. I’m not sure why they felt the need to de-tune the motor from the V85 though (I see a couple of other commenters are wondering the same).

    • Bob Krzeszkiewicz says:

      It isn’t the same engine as the V85TT. Final drive cardan isn’t the same either, but is bigger.

      If they used those items in the V7, then there’s no need for the V9 bikes to exist.

  24. mechanicus says:

    The curmudgeon is appeased. The blue special is a winner.

  25. TP says:

    I like it. Guzzi finally put in all together with this bike. I’m going to look at one at the dealer’s. Shaft drive is super nice.

  26. Mick says:

    Given the price point of these bikes. One would think that they would offer an S model with higher spec suspension and brakes.

    They could update to a more 2021 fork and add a pair of decent front brakes and still come in around the price of a front line dirt bike.

    I suppose the Guzzi guys know exactly what bikes have front ends that are easy to graft on. But it would be nice if you could just pay Guzzi a pile of extra frog skins to set it up that way to begin with.

    • Bob Krzeszkiewicz says:

      They have the V7 Sport. Cheapo version Ohlins rear shocks but the same dog shit forks. But no, it’s not like Triumph who does uprated versions of the Street Triple properly.

  27. The new Guzzis look great but the lack of a dealer network has always kept me from buying one.

  28. PatrickD says:

    Wow, the Special is very tasteful!

    By the way, remember when 850cc was a ‘big’ bike?

  29. Ed says:

    I’m not familiar with the design. Is it only oil cooled engine?

    • Dave says:

      I’m not sure I even see an oil cooler on there. The upper set of fins is the regulator, I think.

      I wish they would do the exercise of implementing water cooling (at least the heads) but that crank case takes up a lot of room where a radiator could be “hidden” like we’ve seen on some other retros, like the Triumphs. They’d be able to get an easy 10+ more hp, better valve and valve seat life, and hit euro5 emissions compliance.

  30. Curly says:

    OK, that’s what a motorcycle looks like. If I was still in the market I’d buy the the Special with that beautiful blue paint and chrome mufflers but also buy a set of the cast wheels. I’d probably polish the spoke edges too then go for a ride.

  31. Buckwheat says:

    Oh waitress! I’ll take one Special please.

  32. todd says:

    I would have to change the tail light but, that’s about it.

  33. bmbktmracer says:

    The V9 had just 55 HP, so the jump to 65 should be just about perfect for a single-disk front brake, thin-forked fun bike. My guess is that with 65 HP it’s probably a blast to ride. The styling is great. The V9s, IMO, were hideous. The V7s had a bad stance, with the rear being too low. This one hits the mark. Beautiful!

    Legacy V7 was $9000, so maybe this one comes in a few hundred higher.

    • VLJ says:

      This new V7 motor doesn’t produce a real 65 hp. Guzzi claims 80 hp for the V85 motor, which produces only 66 hp in the real world. Guzzi claims only 65 hp for this mill, which is closer to V9-spec, and the 850cc motor from the V9 produces only 51 hp in the real world.

      Sure sounds like this one is getting the much less powerful V9 motor. That being the case, plan on a mere 51 rwhp and 47 ft-lbs of torque. We’re not even talking Z650 power, never mind SV650 or MT-07 power.

      • Wendy says:

        Oh, my gawd! A bike that doesn’t make 120BHP! I am clutching my pearls over here. For the type of bike and its suspension and braking, 55 HP should more than get the job.
        I ride my BMW R750/6 and the engine is more than adequate for traffic at 45 BHP.

        • mickey says:

          We all have opinions on what HP and torque it takes to satisfy us. Some people do need 120 hp to be happy. Some are happy at 75, some at 50 some at 25..and some in the teens. We make these decisions for ourselves.

          For me having ridden a MT-03 I can tell you it does not have enough power to make me happy, either does a V7 Guzzi or a CB500x, an NC 750X barely does, SV 650 barely does, my CB1100 is adequate but I could live with a little more, and my FJR has an excess…but I don’t have to use it all.

          again, we make these decision for our self. I can tell you without hesitation, this Moto Guzzi would not have enough horsepower to make ME happy. If it makes someone else happy that’s awesome for them.

        • VLJ says:

          Who said anything abut 120 BHP? Who said anything about “adequate for traffic” being the only goal?

          See, somewhere between 120 BHP and merely being “adequate for traffic” lies a perfectly reasonable expectation of a modern 850cc Italian motorcycle.

          • todd says:

            I’ve found that around 15hp is adequate for exceeding all speed limits and keeping with traffic. Anything more is just for fun.

          • VLJ says:

            It’s an Italian 850. I would like to think that its range of effectiveness should not be limited to puttering around city streets. Keeping up with traffic is not enough, unless you’re talking about a 125cc scooter.

            50-ish rwhp on a 450-lb wet weight (just guessing here) is not going to zip you by a row of lumbering SUVs out on the highway, especially up any sort of grade, and definitely not at elevation. Add a passenger, it’d be even worse.

            An SV650 can manage such duties without complaint, while also still being perfectly content to putter around the city. I would want and expect at least that much oomph from a fairly pricey, Italian 850 that’s supposed to represent a major improvement in power over the previous model.

          • todd says:

            My GB500 is 33hp (don’t know if that’s at the wheel), my XR650L has maybe 35, my CB400F has 35hp and my RT2 (360 enduro) supposedly has 30hp. Each one of these bikes easily outpace traffic and accelerate fine on the highway and up long grades (except the enduro that runs out of breath at around 80 because, gearing). I took the GB500, two up, across the upper span of the San Mateo bridge at over 90 mph. I’ve hit 70 mph on my 90cc, 10hp Yamaha – in a slight tuck. I could go on.

      • Dave says:

        The vehicle industry standard is to cite rated hp at the crankshaft, not the wheel. Roughly extrapolated, this bike’s proposed power to weight will be equivalent to a 3,500lb car with 400hp. While not “exotic”, it will be fast by any reasonable vehicular standard. Does the existence of faster bikes make this one “slow”?

        • VLJ says:

          Why, yes! Yes, it does!

          🙂

          Anyway, the “vehicle industry standard” for motorcycles is not the same as it is for cars. Car manufacturers are often pessimistic when reporting hp. Motorcycle manufacturers are always wildly optimistic, so we know to disregard their pie-in-the-sky claims. Anyone who actually cares about hp wants to know its rear-wheel hp, as measured on a dyno they trust.

          Also, just to be fair, when dealing with a motorcycle’s Hp-to-weight ratio, one needs to include the rider and passenger weights as well, since they comprise a much greater percentage of a motorcycle engine’s overall burden.

          Lastly, comparing the acceleration of an Italian “sporting” motorcycle to that of a typical car is disingenuous at best. No one rides motorcycles in an effort to compete with cars. No one compares them to cars. If it gets down to that level, yes, you know you are riding a very slow motorcycle.

          • Dave says:

            Fair enough, I didn’t include the rider in my rough estimate, though I wouldn’t include a passenger because only a tiny fraction of riders (HD guys notwithstanding) carry passengers with any regularity.

            No “typical” car has 400hp and all cars with this amount of power at the weight I cited are very fast.

        • Jeremy says:

          “Does the existence of faster bikes make this one “slow”?”

          It’s all relative. Just ask Einstein.

          • Dave says:

            The Lockheed SR-71 is the fastest air-breathing aircraft ever created, with a top speed surpassing 2,000mph. The Space Shuttle traveled more than 10x faster. Is the SR-71 slow?

          • Jeremy says:

            Relative to the space shuttle? Yes, it is slow.

            400 hp makes for a fairly quick for a car, though I’m not aware of any such power “standard” that draws a line between what is and isn’t fast for a car. What is and isn’t fast is relative. Not all that long ago, 400 hp would have been an exotic car, which again goes to show that it is all relative. A similar power to weight ratio for a motorcycle isn’t very spectacular at all. If we wanted to go that slow, we’d just buy 400 HP cars.

            Also, you can’t really compare power to weight ratios of cars to that of motorcycles. The comparison is pretty reliable up to about 50 mph. After that, the substantially better aerodynamics of autos really comes into play allowing more of that hp to work on accelerating the car vs overcoming aerodynamic drag. After 60 or 70 mph, a 50 HP bike is a bit of a slug while a 400 go car still feels pretty peppy.

          • VLJ says:

            Can a customer purchase either one and use them for similar purposes, much less purchase them and use them similarly for roughly equivalent money?

            Make apples-to-apples comparisons. There is no point in comparing everyday passenger cars to lightweight motorcycles, or space shuttles to Super Blackbird planes. Compare this Guzzi to other standard motorcycles of similar displacement.

            This is an 850cc Italian standard that costs something like $9K. Compare it to its direct competition (RE 650, Yamaha and Triumph Twins and Triples, Ducati Monsters and Scramblers, middleweight Hondas of various stripes, Harley Sportsters, etc.), not to armored limousines or loaded cement trucks.

            Once you make relevant comparisons, you’ll see where this thing lands on the Hp/weight, performance/dollar value spectrum, and it won’t be pretty.

            Anyone who is being honest will have to admit they’re buying this thing strictly for looks, shaft drive, and the Guzzi cache. They aren’t buying it for engine performance, or value. They’re buying it in spite of its engine performance and value.

          • Dave says:

            It was an analogy that exaggerates the difference in speed between two vehicles, arriving at the conclusion that the slower vehicle is still objectively fast.

            This motorcycle, however many faster motorcycles exist, is objectively fast. You’re right, the kinds of riders who choose it will not prioritize hp/$$ but that’s true of most anyone who doesn’t buy the fastest vehicle in a given class. Harley Davidson would’ve gone out of business in the 60’s if this weren’t the case. Performance doesn’t always mean maximum horsepower.

          • Jeremy says:

            In my opinion, this motorcycle is objectively slow.

    • Phil says:

      I love the look of the V9 Bobber and hence I bought one. I have a fast bike so I wanted a cruiser-like bike and the V9 Bobber does it for me.

      V7 has the classic look for sure but V9’s look stands out from all other ‘retro’ looking bikes.

  34. Vic says:

    5 or 6 speed?

  35. Victor M Force says:

    5 or 6 speed?

  36. Kermit T Frog says:

    Primer paint jobs, single clock and disc up front mean the Stone is out of the running for my money. Adding insult to injury, they put bicycle wheels on the “Special?

    “Well…Isn’t that special?”

    Better looking than that two-wheeled turdle the Blanda Rebel, but Guzzi STILL can’t get it right enough to get my money. The V85 was close but the boob-tube wheels screwed that pooch.

    C’mon Guzzi, Kymco put triple disc brakes on the AK550 scooter and you gave this ride a single stopper up front? Talk about cheap and low performance.

  37. My2cents says:

    I owned a 1984 Honda CX 650 E which wasn’t available in the USA but everywhere else. The styling was very Guzzi like and the advertising of that period had the motorcycle posing in front of the leaning tower of Pisa. It was a fabulous motorcycle filled the duties of sport riding and touring well. I have always had a liking of Moto Guzzi and this step up in displacement was needed to keep everything else in sight.

  38. VLJ says:

    The V85’s claimed 79 hp? In the real world it only makes 66 hp at the rear wheel, and 48 ft-lbs of torque. I don’t know what the V9 motor produces. I assume it’s even less.

    With so little power motivating this thing, I’d like to know its wet weight. If it’s light enough, it could still be decently fun. Also, what’s the tank capacity?

    Nitpicks?

    While some here extol the virtues of tubes, it seems most people prefer tubeless rims on a committed streetbike. The V7 Special isn’t a V85TT. It’s definitely a streetbike that will likely never see any dirt roads, so it’d probably be a good idea for Guzzi to ditch those tubes.

    Speaking of which, all spoked rims and most mag wheels should come standard with right-angle stems. I’m making that particular pet peeve my mission in life to bitch about.

    Is it just me, or should the stripes and logo on the Special’s sidecovers be level, as they are on the tank. I get that those sidecovers slant downward, but the stripes and logo look odd, angling away from the matching items on the tank. I’d want them level, or maybe it’d be better if they retained the sidecover logo, made it level, and ditched the sidecover stripes altogether.

    Otherwise, as long as it’s priced right and the buyer is willing to accept that this thing is going to be a slow, leisurely scoot that’s perfect for the urban landscape as well as quiet country roads, it seems to tick all the important boxes. When thought of as an Italian Royal Enfield Intercepter, which is proving to be quite popular and very well regarded, what’s not to love here?

    Just gotta have a reasonably close, stable Guzzi dealer.

    • mg3 says:

      I think the stripes on the side panels are meant to support the visual line from the header pipe back through the exhaust and intake tracts. They make a nice v-shaped angle with the tank stripe, if you look at it that way. Purely subjective but I see your point.

      • VLJ says:

        Hmmm, I hadn’t noticed that. Now that I see what you’re describing, I think you may be correct. Looking at it that way, it’s not so distracting. It’s not bad at all.

        Good catch.

  39. Neal says:

    Just about perfect. I’ll take a Stone in orange.

  40. xLaYN says:

    “THE NEW, HIGH-PERFORMANCE, 850CC, 65 HP ENGINE”

    According to Wikipedia the Suzuki GS500 is 38hp at the wheel for 500cc, 38 / 500 * 850 = 64.6hp

    So this new engine has the technology of a 1988 bike (assuming the figure provided is at the wheel and not the crank)

    On the other hands it looks nice.

    • badChad says:

      Makes some sense, they both are air cooled twins, however, the 1988 GS didn’t have to try and pass super strict Euro5 emissions! And I can tell you with certainty that the Guzzi twin is far more entertaining to ride.

    • Dave says:

      This is a low-reving cruising engine which probably has a lower rev ceiling than that GS500 had. They did this on purpose, not because they couldn’t get it to spin any faster. hp/cc is not a measure of technology or value.

  41. mickey says:

    Sure is pretty. The V7 sure needed a dose of power. Wonder why they neutered the V85 engine though? The V85 only made 79 hp.

    The bluish one sure is pretty though.

    • Neal says:

      I’m guessing that’s the motor straight out of the V9. The V85 has all sorts of titanium and other special bits in the motor to make the power it does. The V7 is probably given the lower spec motor with cheaper components to keep the price the same.

  42. newtonmetres says:

    pretty but can they fight?

  43. todd says:

    I’d take the blue/purple one with the “bicycle wheels”. Nice upgrade from my R75/5, since I wouldn’t expect much from it.

  44. Nick says:

    Nice-looking bike, and I especially appreciate the kinked exhausts. Very Italian! As Selector says below, hopefully the suspension is better than that on any Guzzi I’ve ridden. They say the shocks have greater travel, and they appear to have multi-rate springs too, so it could be the Guzzi I’ve always fancied. If I was in the market for a new bike, that is.

  45. Dave says:

    Those are classy looking motorcycles.

  46. Selecter says:

    My V7 was the worst-handling bike I’ve ever had. I’m hoping they took some time and energy to actually make the suspension suspend with this version. If they did that, it may be a winner, especially if they keep it near current V7-III levels of pricing. Here’s to hoping!

    • Sleeping Dog says:

      Suspension is likely not any better. But like the Bonneville, you know that going in and you know your going to spend ~$1500 to upgrade the suspension. But, as you know, you smile every time you walk into the garage.

    • tbone34 says:

      I’ve long thought I’d look at a V7 if they upped the power to SV650 levels and made a frame that can handle the canyons. There is a chance I’ll have to put my money where my mouth is!

      • Selecter says:

        Believe it or not, my V7 (Special model, 2015) never had a lick of trouble with the engine, nor did I. Power was entertaining enough, and the gearbox (counter to what many Guzzi people say) was actually very slick and very smooth. Instrumentation was effective, comfort was pretty decent (hard seat, but it softened up after a few thousand miles), and overall assembly quality was really good, just like the V11 LeMans I had before.

        But the chassis itself was SLOW. Transitions were molasses-slow. Turn-in was truck-like. It actually handled like a Bonneville with over 10psi missing out of its tires. But tire pressure wasn’t the issue – handled about the same with 40psi, or with 28. That is… badly.

        As if that wasn’t bad enough, the suspension (the forks in particular) simply didn’t work. Over any kind of bump (small, large, didn’t matter!) the wheels would do their best to become completely disconnected from the ground. Add some corners to it, and it’s simply a recipe for having no fun at all.

        I’ve had a couple of V-Star 1300s. Despite their terrible cornering clearance and 650-710 lb. wet weights, they were MUCH more fun in the turns, and equaled the V7’s fuel economy. Better steering feel (even with fatty 16″ tires), better transitions (Yamaha knows their geometries well), more confidence. This should never happen – the “my cruiser handles better than my standard” quandary.

        If I could confirm for myself that the new V7 has solved the issues with the chassis and suspension, I’d probably trade the V-Star in for one with few reservations.

  47. BOB says:

    That dark blue one sure is pretty.