MV Agusta Forum banner

Is this the real deal?

14K views 44 replies 11 participants last post by  Gitano 
#1 ·
=========================================================================================================================================================
MV Agusta 175 CSS
This bike has earned the original name of Disco Volante by the form of its bulbous gas tank. Developed by Mario Rossi, after designs made by the Count Domenico Agustain the early 1950’s. Representing the super sport variant after the CST and CSTL versions were produced early 1954. This bike was a real sportster.
This version was only available in 1954, the tank was standard on this type. The 175 CSS was characterized by the front suspension following Earless design. This was a race developed suspension as proposed by one of its famous race drivers: Leslie Graham. Besides this front suspension, the other bike characteristics were all the same throughout the series CSTL, CS and CSS.
The engine was an up-tuned version of the CSTL basic lay-out, by means of much more pronounced cam form. Cam lift was a considerable 8,25 mm, and inlet and outlet cams were inter- adjustable. While the CS had an engine that provided very good torque, the CSS engine was tuned for top speed. The cylinder head had much greater cooling fin area. Compression ratio was much higher by means of a high piston. Production numbers were probably no more than 450 units, all made in 1954.

Frame number: 406078 Engine number: 470070 S
MV Agusta Historic Register registration: # 0281

Principal characteristics:
Displacement: 172,4 cc
Bore and stroke: 59,5 x 62 mm
Compression ratio: 8.5 : 1
Overhead cam: Chain drive, cam lift 8.25 mm
Power: 14 hp / 8.000 rpm
Ignition: Flywheel magneto
Carburetor: Dell-Orto SSI 25 ( 22.5 in MSDS form)
Transmission: Four gears
Brakes: Front drum 180 mm, rear drum 150 mm
Wheels, tyres: Alloy, 19 inch, front 2.50 inch, rear 2.75 inch
Dry weight: 103 kg
Maximum speed: 135 km / h

I thought the CSS should have a engine number starting with 45 and ending with a SS(lower case).
 

Attachments

See less See more
1
#4 ·
Just got confirmation from someone who knows the bike and owner and its not a original bike .Although owner was saying it was but could not provide any information to back that up when I asked. So I'm out
 
#5 · (Edited)
Unfortunately Adrian, that's the way it is with these things - even the experts can't agree on them so unless you'd just like to own a pretty bike (which it very much is) and are happy to pay the asking price then there's other models to look at.

Ah... the Disco minefield. I keep looking & keep getting scared away from them. :)
 
#6 ·
I thought the CSS should have a engine number starting with 45 and ending with a SS(lower case).
Motor number prefix 45 is not the only correct prefix for SS.
47 prefix is correct with one S.

The example in the photo you provided has enough clues (my opinion FWIW) it's a "replica".

Good luck in your hunt, don't give up!
 
#7 ·
The owner said this bike was a transition model . This is his response after i said bike is fake/replica.

There is absolutely nothing fake on or about this machine..
The frame has the 40.. early figures. The engine has the very early 470.. numbers with a single S (Though the engine has the CSS specification with mutually adjustable inlet and outlet camshaft and high piston). In the transitional period from the CSS (only made in 1954, and very beginning 1955) to the simpler CS (made from early 1955) there were transition models made between those two models, with the frame still CSS (1954), and the engine CS (1955).
The reason for this was that the production lines were not parallel. These transitional models are confirmed to me by Enrico Sironi, the museum director of MV (successor of Vincent Rossi, the designer of the 175), and by Gian Pio Ottone, the former trial driver of the factory who rode the 175 dirt bike. (only two ever built).
In addition, the historical MV Agusta registery also recognized it as a CSS model and has confirmed this by registering the bike accordingly as the bike is in accordance with the known data.
All this information I am also using in my book about the MV Agusta 175 series. I fear that what has been assumed is based on not being fully aware of the information as given.

I don't believe this, especially after I asked for documents to back this up he can't provide.
 
#8 ·
I don't know, that sounds somewhat legitimate, but what do i know. Is there anyway that you could do some research like calling the Agusta Museum to find out if those years and that number combination is in fact in the registry?

That sure is a lot of information for it to be a fake, a lot of information that could be checked out I would think. I would cut-and-paste and forward that on to someone more in the know before I gave it the fake stamp of disapproval.
Usually if you're calling somebody out on a fake and they know it, they don't give such a response. They are usually waiting for the guy that has not done his homework.
 
#10 ·
Is this what it should look like?. Do you have any pictures of original bikes
 

Attachments

#11 ·
Hi Adrian,

These photos showed up on the current MV factory web site. They appear to be period publicity shots of a production 1954 MV Agusta 175 CSS.

A true work of art, even in black and white. :love: Which is why they deserve to be preserved, or restored correctly, so they look like they were designed to look.

Ivan
 

Attachments

#13 ·
Here's one reason to think the CS Sport and CSS Super Sport were introduced at the same time. Check out those white letter Pirellis and what looks to my eye like a red battery. I wish more of the CSS version was visible so we could see if it had a 3-screw points cover. The standard-fork Disco Sport on the left looks like it has a 2-hole points cover.

Mick Walker's many books were churned out quickly so may not always bee 100% accurate but are still a wealth of period information. If you see one of these at a book sale grab it.
 

Attachments

#14 ·
Thanks Ivan, great photos.
Don't mind a replica, but if the price reflects that. That is the problem,sellers trying to sell replicas at high prices and denying that they are fake.
The hunt continues
 
#15 ·
Hi all.
Uncharacteristically for this group, Australian mr. Adrian has been suggesting in his post, that the MV 175 CSS I have for sale, is a fake. Nothing has been put forward prudently by him, nor did he show any proof. Moreover, mr. Adrian sees himself as “knowledgeable” to dictate clearly his self-pronounced “expert” vision to other members of the group.
I have now proof that Mr. Adrian did so for no other reasons than to his own advantage. The thought is to give himself room to obtain the desired bike at a discount price, and at the same time to discourage others in the group to have a proper look and maybe interest in that bike. The proof is that Mr. Adrian is now suggesting to my sales agent to buy the desired bike at a reduced price-level.
Anyone knowing the historic surroundings of the nineteen fifties, can agree that the bikes frame number is certainly mid or late 1954, while the engine number is a very early (1954 late fall) CS engine number, starting with 470…S. The real experts from that time have certified that there was a change-over period between these models, such as is the case with my bike. Moreover the top-end of the engine is purely CSS specification ( piston, valves, cams).
There is really nothing wrong with this bike, the tool boxes are missing however.
In my opinion mr. Adrian has shown clearly not to belong the group of MV lovers who normally have access to this group. He is just apparently suggesting mistakes, and trying to obtain the bike at a lower price. Thereafter, once in Australia, he will certainly make his good profits by selling it to the highest possible price, cashing his profits. My agent, who has sold rare bikes to Australia, informed me that more persons act that way in Australia .
I am strongly suggesting to the modus operandi of this group to exclude mr. Adrian and persons acting similarly, from being a member.
 
#17 ·
You are wrong,and you do not know me. I asked for you or your seller to provide documentation/ proof of what you said ,bike being a transition model. Which you can not provide, and I'm only stating the obvious. And I have also spoken to another well known member on here who knows you and the bike and has confirmed with me this bike is 100%replica. So don't talk shit if you can not back up anything you have said.
I don't buy bikes to sell for profit but only for personal use.
I am sick of people trying to pass bikes off as the real thing when they simply aren't and asking huge prices. Especially this model of bike...
 
#16 ·
To Ivan,

Most of the time I appreciate your knowledge of the 175 series.
However, here you are making a mistake in your opinion.
After numerous visits to the museum and very many other persons from those early times
I am convinced of the details I gave here.
Many details of such information are not on paper, and cannot legally been justified
However, some unknowledgeables of nowadays think they can have it all on paper,
reasoning from the distance
Detail: The CS engine 470...S in this transitional period does have the three screw
ignition chamber cover
gerard
 
#19 ·
Here is a link to an old customized 175 MV Sport I just spotted on the www.

http://databikes.com/infophoto/other/mv_agusta_mv_agusta_175_sport-1955.html

The sellers description is accurate, but brief... and funny when translated in Google: "1955 MV Agusta 175 Sport anus the bike has been transformed into a model with sporty tachometer magnets fork platforms: backward and more. oh, and documents guard plate, is in good condition" :laughing:

I'm sharing this bike as an example of why a modified bike is nothing to be ashamed of! Don't try to give it airs... factory special racing limited homage edition. That's :jerkoff:. Just call it what it is.... a custom!

Even though I like old bikes in their original form, I appreciate modified machines too. Period performance or aesthetic mod's, if they improve on the original, can be really interesting and make a machine unique and special. This one isn't 100% pleasing to my eye yet, but it has tons of potential. It wouldn't take much to look just like a period racer, and if the vintage patina could be retained, even better. Just don't try to pass it off as something it isn't (see photo below of Tommy Robb on a '55-'56 MV 175) . Perfect for an MV enthusiast who rides in Moto Giro events or has an interest in 1950's MV racing history (as I do). If this bike were for sale in the US I'd love to have it!

Ivan

PS- dunno Tommy Robb? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommy_Robb
 

Attachments

#20 ·
I have not seen any prices listed in this thread yet...

I'll give ya 20 bucks for it and promise not to sell it to any other Aussie for more than the 20 bucks plus freight...

:popcorn:
 
#21 ·
Hi Gerard,
Wow! Quite a fireworks show. Hint: you don't want to make the Aussies mad, they can hold a grudge all the way until happy hour. :friday:

I'm sorry if you feel bad. Was not my intention. You've always been helpful to me. I gave honest observations to help Adrian. It is smart of him to ask questions and learn what he can. As an owner of nice old motorcycles it is surely in my best interest (and yours, too) that buyers become discerning, otherwise what is the point?

On the "transition period" of yours, I'm skeptical. I've only seen some variance in motor parts in 1954 Sports. Not much on the rest of the machine. These bikes were the flagship of MV Agusta, the unrestored ones I have seen (a dozen at least) are pretty consistent. My opinion is that a highly visible variation (tanks, forks, fenders, seat, etc) must have solid documentation or provenance that it came that way when new. Otherwise they are the same as someone changing parts around in their garage. A lot of these bikes have been crashed and raced and rebuilt, so parts did get changed around over the years. If you have documentation especially on CSS variations, I'm all ears. I would like to learn more if you can share.

Best regards,
Ivan
 
#24 ·
Appreciate your input on this subject Ivan
 
#26 ·
I should know better, but some force is making me add a comment here, so...
as Background, I'm in my sixties and have ridden, raced, abused and admired motorcycles all of my life.
Without getting too deep in semantics, the problem I see is with the use of the word 'real'. As a teenager, my friends and I would always modify our bikes- from crash damage or just to look like racers from the magazines. I consider a motorcycle that has passed through the hands of several owners and had parts repaired and replaced over several decades to be absolutely 'real'- I go even further, and consider any given model to be a collection of parts, and to me it doesn't make any difference if those parts were assembled in the factory in the 1950s or from parts collected on Ebay in 2013- it's just a collection of parts.
It's obvious that I don't consider myself a 'collector', since to those guys knowing that the motorcycle is absolutely unchanged from the day it rolled out of the factory is the most important thing- a collector wants a bike to be 'original'.
So, I think a motorcycle can be 'real' even if it's not 'original'- it may sound like I'm being a clown, but I think it's an important distinction.
I studied the picture of the bike being offered, and other than what looked to be rear shocks on the front and no toolboxes, I couldn't see much wrong with it, which is in no way the same as saying it left the factory as a CS or CSS- it's almost impossible to know that. Collectors pay a huge premium to get a provenance that confirms the chain of owners, modifications, etc- without a provenance it's a nice collection of parts and a beautiful motorcycle, but collector types probably won't be satisfied with it- I like it.
In 2013 I would hope that everyone understands the difference in price between a motorcycle with a provenance and one offered with the Ebay 'you get what's in the picture' pedigree- probably 2 or 3 times the price for a documented bike.
If it's a lot of money it's worth a plane ticket to look it over- there are reproductions of some parts, but, for instance, handmade gas tanks almost never duplicate the look of factory tanks that are stamped and pressed- I've never seen a handmade tank that had a factory looking tunnel or underside.
Rick
 
#29 ·
Fantastic post Rick.

Thank you for your input - I agree with you 100%.

I believe the word 'fake' is what got things out of hand here - Adrain never used that word - he was questioning its provenance as it is his prerogative to with anything for sale on the open market & Gerard (the vendor) was offended and perhaps misinterpreted the intention. I can understand Gerard's viewpoint (as I can Adrian's) after all motorcycles are an emotive subject and Gerard felt his baby was being insulted.

No one is saying it is a fake - it is DEFINITELY an MV Agusta 175 no arguments or question about that from anyone - "provenance" is the key word. Again what constitutes a Disco Volante & what doesn't? We have seen much input here not just in this thread but ANYTIME a
'disco volante' shows up without any definitive resolution.

That's why I made the "here we go...." Comment as soon as I saw this thread go up.

I know Adrain personally & can vouch for him as a stand up honest guy. I have dealt with Gerard previously & he has been a gentleman in every respect with me in all his correspondence.

Heated exchanges involving motorcycles I can forgive, after all if wasn't such an emotive & passionate thing - I don't think many of us would be here.

We are still of a more "gentlemanly" nature here in the Classics section than the rest of the forum - let's maintain our standards!

Cheers
Rob
 
#27 ·
I'm sorry, but looking at this photo:


then this one:


I struggle to see any differences other than the missing oil tank and maybe the horn ...... but then I know nothing of these bikes but am willing to be educated .....
 
#33 ·
Agree on this 100%.
I can't see much of a difference either and used even magnifying glasses.
It simply beyond me how there can be so much hatred about a fantastic machine.
 
#28 ·
From what i can see: Front forks are different , front guard,wrong engine number stamping and no tool boxes
 
#35 ·
things I noticed :
front forks are different, no pin stripe on tank at barber, no took boxes on Gerard's, seat different,head light different , and head light holder, horn different, tach different,different colour red between the two.
I'm no expert but that's what I can see.
 
#36 · (Edited)
I did not perceive any "hatred" in this thread. Some points were made regards whether or not something is being represented accurately by the seller. It's a very normal conversation to have.

btw Thank you Haupti for the excellent CSS handbook PDF link.

The handbook and the factory photos I posted here earlier should be helpful to ID the features special to the CSS: tank (is it steel), Earles fork, head, carburetor, points cover, inlet manifold, handlebars. Looking closer, the Earles fork must have the correct axle, bosses and gussets (shape and placement), tubing diameters, bend radius, and shock chambers. The front fender has a very large recess for the fork pivot and yet must easily clear the tire. The kickstarter lever should be folding type. The handlebars should be "clip ons" with integral switch and lever perches. Headlight CEV 130 with rotary switch and "key". The red Radaelli saddle (same as the CS Sport) is slightly longer than usual seats, and has 6 rivets. The frame is the same as the CS Sport, including the seat mounts, toolbox brackets, and battery tray. The battery is the same too, the large early style, it rests on a flat platform welded to the frame. Those are most of the easy things to check. The inside of the motor is difficult, but basically the same as a 1954-55 CS Sport except for a cam and a piston, and maybe valves.

Of course it's impossible to see everything using a photo. But some things can be seen even without magnifying glasses.

Looking at Haupti's photo of the MV Museo CSS I see an older restoration. The restorer changed a few things: the red paint color is a little too hot, the tire pump mounts are missing, the horn bezel is painted, and the tank stripe is black. The motor unfortunately has the wrong style of clutch cover. But I have seen this bike in person in Cascina Costa, and IMHO it is an authentic CSS.
 
#37 ·
Like others, I like to see this sort of discussion without saying anything offensive or feeling offended, and, I've learned something from Ivan's last post. I could see bottom lip of the front fender was way too close to the tire, but thought it might be a much higher profile tire- it definitely didn't look right. When Ivan commented that "The front fender has a very large recess for the fork pivot and yet must easily clear the tire.", I finally saw what I'd missed before- there is a large lip formed into the fender that is almost flush with the back of the swingarm tube- I found some pictures to show it:

There's also a good photo of it on Phil Aynsley's site, but I'm not sure how he feels about his photos being reused, so here's a link:
http://www.philaphoto.com/imageLibrary/displayimage.php?album=1023&pos=0
Maybe everyone one else saw it right off- I didn't. The good news is that it appears to be the same fender with the lip formed into it. A deep draw die like the one needed to form this fender is really expensive- the factory may have used the same pressed part and done a secondary operation to form the lip- a good sheet metal worker could probably stretch and shrink that lip into the fender and get it sitting right- it doesn't look right as it is.
I still can't see what's wrong with the forks, other than the shocks and now the fender. It may be that the axle can be inserted from either side to account for the tommy bar side and the nut side being inverted- an axle isn't real hard to make or get made if it's not the right one.
I'd like to own one of these someday, so discussion of the finer points is great to read.
Rick
 
#38 ·
Rick here are some snapshots w additional fork details. Images of three different authentic CSS MV 175's, all restored. All in the US SF Bay area.
 

Attachments

#41 ·
I have seen multiple MV 175s fitted with Earles forks of varying looks, different from the CSS fork. Are they some factory special equipment? In Italy, anything is possible.

Some of the steel tubing used by MV in the 50's is of a diameter no longer available today. On a 175 you might spot this difference in the upper tube diameter (it may make the lower tubing look smaller) where it meets the triple tree.

There is no axle clamp on most CSS bikes I have seen (that is why they use a tommy bar). But I've seen axle clamps twice, each different.

A little history on the "Earles" forks. Ernie Earles was an engineer from Birmingham England. In the 50's he would build his forks to whatever machine you brought him, and seems at one time may have sold kits by mail order. You see Earles forks on old bikes now and then - sometimes the owner will say it is a factory prototype / special but often it is just a regular machine custom fitted with an aftermarket fork. The design adds rigidity and a bit of travel, and was very beneficial for sidecar use. Earles licensed his patent to BMW and MV among others.

Check out this Parilla (not mine!) road racer with a beautiful factory Earles design fork, big brake, and what appear to be original adjustable damping shock absorbers. This was very "trick" technology for the period. (see photo) The MV design is crude by comparison, but may have less unsprung weight and be stiffer.
 

Attachments

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top