From Cycle World:
http://www.cycleworld.com/article.asp?section_id=3&article_id=804
excerpted...
"The GT 200 upgraded the Vespa to a new standard appropriate for the third millennium. The next big update, the GTS 250, added extra spice to the concept. It was quicker, faster and featured a revised front-end geometry that improved steering response, while retaining the traditional trailing-link layout. A totally revised, leading-link front suspension would have enhanced the virtues of the chassis in terms of front-end response, stability and all-around riding quality, but that would have eliminated a traditional Vespa design hallmark. The following version, the GTS 250ie, was so brilliant that it seemed to represent the final evolution of the Vespa concept. It retained the traditional front-end design, but sported reduced rake that enhanced the precision of the steering response, and the engine's performance was terrific."
This article on the 300 doesn't cite specific geometry changes, only an improvement in chassis rigidity. It does cite geometry changes in earlier models that seem to contradict a perceived need for more geometry-related stability (i.e. reduced rake does improve steering response, but tends to impair stability).
Increasing rear spring preload would decrease trail, also impairing stability
But, such stability impairment usually surfaces as a "falling in" feeling upon corner entry on conventional forks. I have never seen wobble arise from aggressive geometry on my bikes.
My Vespa continues to mystify me, but I believe other unique characteristics (rear weight bias and trailing link caster effect) are contributing factors. Maybe, this combination makes Vespas very sensitive to tire condition, tire wear and passenger loading?
Finally, I may be mistaken, but the first pictures of a 300 I saw lead me to believe Vespa had increased rake and trail.