I think the single sided swing arm is one of the coolest motorcyle innovations. Does anyone know its history, where it came from etc? Also is there any performance related advantages, or is it just made to look cool? Other than Honda, Ducati and Triumph, does anyone else single sided swingarms?
It's big advantage is quickness and ease of removing and replacing the rear wheel. I've forgotten in my old age, but I believe ELF developed the SSSA (that's why ELF is on the swingarm of our VFR's). Not counting their development bike, it probably first appeared on a Honda V-Four endurance racer at the Eight Hours of Suzuka endurance race back in the late 80's.
Not so much a race-replica as a TT-F1 racer you could hang a license plate on, Honda?s RC30 had come and gone before most of us realized what we?d missed. As the 1980s gave way to the ?90s, V-four engines replaced the inline layout as Honda?s corporate performance signature. Developed to show the world what Honda could do if cost was no object, the RC30 was originally offered in Europe in ?88. By the time Honda brought it to America in ?90, the bike had won two World Superbike titles under expatriate American Fred Merkel.
Distinguished by RC30 decals rather than the VFR750R designation used elsewhere, U.S.-spec RC30s came with all the requisite emissions plumbing. Hand-built by special teams of workers in Honda?s HRC works in Hamamatsu, the bike was tiny, powered by an exquisite 748cc Vee. Honda claimed 118 horsepower at 11,000 rpm for the 488-pound (wet) package. That?s porky by modern standards. But 15 years ago it was 24 pounds lighter than a ZX-7 and 9 pounds lighter than Suzuki?s GSX-R750.
At that point the Honda stood out like a Rolex in a sea of Timexes, and it was easily the trickest production bike we?d ever seen. It featured titanium connecting rods spinning a 360-degree crankshaft, a single-sided swingarm lifted from the Elf Honda endurance racer and loads of nifty touches such as quick-release fasteners for the front axle and bodywork.
Buffering a 24-degree rake with just 91mm of trail and measuring 55.5 inches between contact patches, handling is predictably quick but surprisingly forgiving. A preposterously tall first-gear?more suited to the Bol d?Or than American pavement?explained a disappointing 11.8-second best at the dragstrip, but the bike was stunning everywhere else.
Good for 153 mph tapped out in sixth gear, Honda?s sporting flagship ran a single mph ahead of Kawasaki?s speedy ZX-7.
The real RC magic is subjective.
Aimed down any twisty road or racetrack, it raised the proverbial bar with performance that was out of reach for Suzuki?s blue-collar GSX-R or Kawasaki?s ZX-7. So was the $14,998 sticker price?a tall stack of cash way back when The Simpsons started showing up on Sunday nights. And aside from being a twinge down on power, a well-preserved RC30 can still upstage various allegedly modern sportbikes.
Internal engine tolerances were exceedingly tight. Spinning the V-four hard before it was warm could seize it. Merciless high-rpm running can stretch the valves, wreaking subsequent havoc downstream. Fed by four 38mm Keihin carbs, RC30 engines run hot despite dual radiators. The temp gauge rarely dips under 200 degrees F. The front brake rotors are prone to warp as well. As with any hand-built bike, cosmetic imperfections are common. The trailing edges of original fairing panels have a distinct, rounded lip. Aftermarket replacements will drive the price down.
Price? Knowledgeable SoCal collectors say a typical example?clean, ridden occasionally with 15?20,000 miles?usually goes for between $12,000 and $15,000. A perfect RC30 with zero miles can sell for more than $25,000. But for devotees of the breed lucky enough to find an RC30 that hasn?t been converted into a racer, crashed or both, price is less important than owning 488 pounds of pure Honda V-four history.
Aprilia also uses a SSS on the Futura, and BMW has used them for years too.
IIRC there was an Italian bike built in the 1940's with SSS, and scooters have had them for eons.
An additional advantage of the SSS is the ease of chain adjustment via the rotating eccentric hub. The disadvantage is that as the chain wears, the bikes suspension geometry changes.
SSS is also a fair bit heavier than conventional swingarm, and since quick-change rear ends were developed for conventional swingarms the SSS is no longer an advantage in pitstops.
Slightly OT, but this is an excellent site for checking out the various bike suspension styles - has very good graphic representation of how each style works.
Of the current or recent single-sided swingarms, I think the VFR's are probably the ugliest (although the BMW's is a tad industrial). Triumph, Ducati and MV all have prettier ones, with the MV having to be the pick of the bunch. And it's not just the swingarm itself - the hub on the VFR750 and 800 is an ugly thing. Why couldn't Honda have made it less chunky?
Climb aboard a VFR after riding a conventionally-swingarmed bike, especially one with a fairly light swingarm, and the first thing you'll notice is the higher unsprung weight of the rear end. The back wheel clunks and bangs over ripples, potholes and smaller bumps. It's not the most sensible of designs. Then there's the problem of water and dirt ingress via the holes/ports in the swingarm, getting into the rear hub and seizing things up.
But it's really kewl being able to adjust the chain so readily, without worrying if the axle is straight.
Of the current or recent single-sided swingarms, I think the VFR's are probably the ugliest (although the BMW's is a tad industrial). Triumph, Ducati and MV all have prettier ones, with the MV having to be the pick of the bunch. And it's not just the swingarm itself - the hub on the VFR750 and 800 is an ugly thing. Why couldn't Honda have made it less chunky?
Climb aboard a VFR after riding a conventionally-swingarmed bike, especially one with a fairly light swingarm, and the first thing you'll notice is the higher unsprung weight of the rear end. The back wheel clunks and bangs over ripples, potholes and smaller bumps. It's not the most sensible of designs. Then there's the problem of water and dirt ingress via the holes/ports in the swingarm, getting into the rear hub and seizing things up.
But it's really kewl being able to adjust the chain so readily, without worrying if the axle is straight.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Are you sure the rear wheel clanking around has anything to do with the higher unsprung weight of the SSA and isn't just the craptacular nature of the VFRs stock shock or it's linkage design?
There are plenty of Ducs and Triumphs that have a much more supple rear end despite having the SSA design.
I think the SSA itself only became a limitation in racing recently... at race speeds and at race needs for the lightest weight.
I haven't rode a VFR with a better shock but I'm guessing that would really clean up the feeling of the rear end of the bike. Heck mine even feels better just by tacking on a passenger or the hardbags with some weight. I think the rear of the bike just isn't properly sorted stock.
The single sided swingarm was invented around 1980 by Guy Coulon when he was a
chief mechanic at Elf sponsored World Endurance Racing... Honda bought the rights
because it afforded ultra quick wheel changes... at the time Honda's V4s were shredding
tires at a alarming rate...
Ducati's chief designer... Massimo Tamburini... is on record stating that he was inspired
by the 1990 NR750 (RC40) and copied the SSA and under tail exhaust... the result... 94
Ducati 916... http://www.reeky.org/gallery/NR750
SSS is also a fair bit heavier than conventional swingarm, and since quick-change rear ends were developed for conventional swingarms the SSS is no longer an advantage in pitstops.
The material I've seen suggests the SSS is 12% heavier than a conventional dual-sided swingarm.
Pitstops aside, it's really nice to be able to easily remove the wheel for tire changes. I can take my rear wheel off in about 5 min and not even get dirty - try that with a dual where you have to loosen calipers, remove cotter pins, undo bolts, remove washers, slide axles out and pull chains away from rear sprockets.
Honda pitched it from the RC45 once the bike started making over 175 hp in race trim around 1996 - too flexy.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Honda experimented with a DSS dual sided swingarm on the RC45 but did not adopt it
citing no clear advantage over the cast magnesium single sided swingarm... you have to
remember that a cast magnesium SSS is lighter or just as light as a cast and extruded
aluminum DSS...
I think Ducati cites cost as the reason for going with a DSS after years campaigning a
SSS...
Who cares about old racebikes. The RC30/45 all probably get schooled by today's stock 1000RR anyway.
Point was has anyone else rode the Ducs or Triumphs with single sided swingarms and disagree with me that they don't have any of the problems the VFR has?
I think the VFR just needs a better shock, the SSA does not need to go to increase the suspension quality of the rear end.
Honda experimented with a DSS dual sided swingarm on the RC45 but did not adopt it?
citing no clear advantage over the cast magnesium single sided swingarm... you have to
remember that a cast magnesium SSS is lighter or just as light as a cast and extruded
aluminum DSS...?
?
I think Ducati cites cost as the reason for going with a DSS after years campaigning a?
SSS...
I dunno!, It aint an RC anymore without the SSS IMO!
I actually quit following SBK when the double swinger 45s came out. The vision didn't seem to be focused for Honda anymore. Never mind the VTR1000, which seemed like such a techno reverse for Honda. It doesn't help that I find them less attractive than the RCs. It also seems to be an admittance of defeat to the V twin "Ducky" philosophy of racing.
V-fourever!!!!
Point was has anyone else rode the Ducs or Triumphs with single sided swingarms and disagree with me that they don't have any of the problems the VFR has?
I think the VFR just needs a better shock, the SSA does not need to go to increase the suspension quality of the rear end.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Completely agree! While I don't have an expensive aftermarket shock, I did throw an F4i shock on. Night and day!! The spring is a bit light (sag is perfect, but maxed out on the pre-load setting) ~ the action is much smoother than the stock shock was. I can only imagine an how much better a good shock would be!
Honda experimented with a DSS dual sided swingarm on the RC45 but did not adopt it
citing no clear advantage over the cast magnesium single sided swingarm... you have to
remember that a cast magnesium SSS is lighter or just as light as a cast and extruded
aluminum DSS...
I think Ducati cites cost as the reason for going with a DSS after years campaigning a
SSS...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Larry, what's happening with your HRC kit swingarm?
Completely agree! While I don't have an expensive aftermarket shock, I did throw an F4i shock on. Night and day!! The spring is a bit light (sag is perfect, but maxed out on the pre-load setting) ~ the action is much smoother than the stock shock was. I can only imagine an how much better a good shock would be!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
what year cbr shocks work on the vtecs?
what year cbr shocks work on the vtecs?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The 600 F4i shocks work. Mine was from a 2003. They are about 10mm short, so will have to shim it. I weigh about 175 geared up, so if you are more will have to get a different spring. Changing the pre-load is impossible unless you make a tool (the adjustment is on the bottom of the shock ~ ends up inside the swingarm). I adjusted it while installing ~ bolt it in, check sag, take it out and adjust, put it back in.....etc. I did it as more of an experiment since you can get one for like $20 delivered on ebay...turned out much better than I expected.
[edit]
If looking for an F4i shock on ebay, they are the ones with the yellow spring...I believe the ones with the red spring are for F3's.
The VFR's suspension definately has room for improvement, especially for bigger heavier riders. I know VFR FLYER is currently having a Pensky rear shock and Racetech springs put on his 5th Gen. Maybe he could give us a comparison when this blasted rain stops. There are many VFR members that have done suspension upgrades and could shed some light on this subject.
As much as I love the SSS on the VFRs and RCs, there is something about it that was never really fixed. The problem of the ride height and geometry being affected by the eccentric hub chain adjustment system. The tighter you go with the chain, the lower the tail drops. There were eccentric flip solutions that people came up with, but they were not that simple to do and rear brake caliper configurations on some models that made it even more complicated to do.
Havng the SSSA is one of the reasons I bought my VFR, and I love it every time I look at it.
There are always pros and cons to most anything, and personally after seeing my buddy trying adjust the chain on his R1, with no centerstand, and on a conventional swingarm, I will take my chances with the viffer, :D
Busy had it right. Elf develpoed the technology back in the day. I can remember seeing those bikes race and thinking that swingarm was the coolest thing on the planet.
As much as I love the SSS on the VFRs and RCs, there is something about it that was never really fixed. The problem of the ride height and geometry being affected by the eccentric hub chain adjustment system. The tighter you go with the chain, the lower the tail drops. There were eccentric flip solutions that people came up with, but they were not that simple to do and rear brake caliper configurations on some models that made it even more complicated to do.
Beck
95 VFR
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How much does that really matter for street & even most track riding?
The problem of the ride height and geometry being affected by the eccentric hub chain adjustment system. The tighter you go with the chain, the lower the tail drops.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Technically, The sss would lower the tail and extend the length of the bike while a standard arm would raise the tail (depending on the angle of the arm) and extend the length of the bike. Neither solution is perfect.
benSV, on Feb 28 2006, 05:43 PM, said:
How much does that really matter for street & even most track riding?
We're really grasping at straws in this thread.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
How much does that really matter for street & even most track riding?
We're really grasping at straws in this thread.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It does affect the VFR's already sluggish turn-in handling (too much understeer).
I had to raise my tail by 20+mm (washers added to upper rear shock mount) to regain some flickability after I tightened my chain a couple of times.
Try it and find out for yourself.
Technically, The sss would lower the tail and extend the length of the bike while a standard arm would raise the tail (depending on the angle of the arm) and extend the length of the bike. Neither solution is perfect.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Buell has the solution with the tensioner arm, similar to what is supplied on a car surpentein(sp.) belt. With this method the rear axle is fixed and the tensioner takes up the slack, no adjustment needed.This could be done with a chain, but would not look near as nice.
It does affect the VFR's already sluggish turn-in handling (too much understeer).
I had to raise my tail by 20+mm (washers added to upper rear shock mount) to regain some flickability after I tightened my chain a couple of times.
Try it and find out for yourself.
Beck
95 VFR
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
For the sluggish...that's why I lowered the forks 25mm and raised the tail 5mm. If you've had to tighten your chain that much then it's time for a new chain / sprocket set!!
:goofy:
chris2992, on Feb 28 2006, 06:03 PM, said:
Buell has the solution with the tensioner arm, similar to what is supplied on a car surpentein(sp.) belt. With this method the rear axle is fixed and the tensioner takes up the slack, no adjustment needed.This could be done with a chain, but would not look near as nice.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
For the sluggish...that's why I lowered the forks 25mm and raised the tail 5mm.? If you've had to tighten your chain that much then it's time for a new chain / sprocket set!!?
:goofy:
Buell's setup is pretty neat!!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Tail drops quite a bit even at the first few adjustments for chain tension.
I slid the fork tubes up the triples by 13+mm together with the rear shock shimming.
My 4th gen handles beautifully (very close to neutral with much quicker transitions) because of these adjustments. The bike can attack the mountain tiwsties with much more confidence.
Still wouldn't have had to do as much adjustments if the eccentric did not contribute to the rear end going down.
Been there, done that!.....except for the eccentric hub flip, which has too many other issues attached to it, IMO.
I have modded mine so the eccentric can be flipped, mainly to increase clearance between the tyre and the underseat exhaust. It's not hard to do at all, so long as you're comfortable about stripping the rear end down and using a countersink to mod the brake caliper bracket flange (drillpress is best).
And I for one care about old racebikes - the bikes being raced today will be old racebikes in years to come, and I'll be enjoying the flow-on benefits of the current racing technology that will filter down to roadbikes. And don't be too quick to dismiss the RC30/45 - given equal riding ability the CBR1000RR wouldn't have an easy time against them.
Back OT - the MV Agusta F4 SSS was the subject of a university thesis during its design! Pretty cool.
I have modded mine so the eccentric can be flipped, mainly to increase clearance between the tyre and the underseat exhaust. It's not hard to do at all, so long as you're comfortable about stripping the rear end down and using a countersink to mod the brake caliper bracket flange (drillpress is best).
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
On the 90-93 models, the eccentric rotates without any modification being necessary.
I suspect that the reverse of this 'mod' can be done by those that own gen 5 and 6 VFRs and are 'altitudinally challenged' or just dwarfish. Reversing the exxcentric so it sits above the centreline of the swingarm should lower the bike a bit in the rear, then the forks can be raised through the fork thingies (technical term) to drop the front end and restore that crisp, 'turn-on-a-dime' (whatever a dime is) steering that VFRs are renowned for. :rolleyes:
Honda experimented with a DSS dual sided swingarm on the RC45 but did not adopt it
citing no clear advantage over the cast magnesium single sided swingarm... you have to
remember that a cast magnesium SSS is lighter or just as light as a cast and extruded
aluminum DSS...
I think Ducati cites cost as the reason for going with a DSS after years campaigning a
SSS...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
The RC45's were using a conventional swingarm during their last couple of years racing though. They got the SSSA for production, but were later raced with regular arms.
The RC45's were using a conventional swingarm during their last couple of years racing though. They got the SSSA for production, but were later raced with regular arms.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
all of this talk about the attitude of the VFR relating to ride height has me thinking. i am having my forks rebuilt and a new Ohlins put on this saturday. I am going to set my initial sag at 32mm front and rear. Should I have the guy raise the fork tubes a bit while he is at it? If so, how much?
If so, how much?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Let's see... Sagacious went 25mm and Beck went 13mm, so all you have to do is split the difference and go 19mm. Then shim your rear 12.5mm (based on the same formula).
Then decide it's still not good enough, put an RC51 front end on it and order up a Penske rear. Or just do this last bit first! :goofy:
Safe-T, thanks for pointing out that the SSSA is only 12% heavier. For the real-world benefits, that's one area where I don't mind my VFR being a bit heavier than the "competition", even if I do wish it looked like MV Agusta's. I figure a good rear shock ought to sort out the SSSA well enough for my needs. The stock Showa is too coarse for the sophisticated machine it's attached to (as are the front forks).
Let's see... Sagacious went 25mm and Beck went 13mm, so all you have to do is split the difference and go 19mm. Then shim your rear 12.5mm (based on the same formula).
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
pardon my ignorance on this issue, but if I am dropping the front attitude why would I want to raise the rear too? I realize that is giving more pronounced angle but why not just drop the front about 13mm to start with and leave the rear alone? is there some magic prinicipal about doing the rear too? Is there too much that one can go on the front? obviously someone went 25mm.
so by doing this mod, the bike will turn quicker, respond better to input etc? please explain
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
you are basically changing the rake by dropping nose/raising rear. less rake equals sharper steering at the loss of stability. the vfr is so naturally stable that the loss is negligable. my ducati i had on the other hand was very dependant on ride height. not set right and the headshake got scarey
The most obvious reason to up the rear ride height rather than drop the front is to maintain or increase groundclearance.
The VFR is very stable, but does understeer somewhat as set-up from the factory. Increasing steeringhead angle takes it a bit closer to neutral, but there's a cut-off point whereby the chassis can be upset by bumps and fast changes of direction (fast being a relative term when we're talking VFR handling...) - read: headshake.
I got mine to headshake pretty violently once when WOT up a concrete freeway ramp that had a wavy surface - I took my hand off the left 'bar to close my visor and the front end just went nuts. Scary stuff, and my hand was off the 'bar for less than a second.
So I'm a bit wary of going too far with increased rake...
Safe-T is correct regarding optimum swingarm attack angle, back when the flipped eccentric mod was being researched a couple of US guys wrote some very good stuff about this very topic. I'll see if I can dig it up.
Teleskier, understeer means the bike still wants to go straight ahead when you try to turn it. Oversteer means the rear feels like it wants to come around during cornering; no-one particularly likes this in a roadbike (well, McCoy and Capirossi might :blink: ) but for a motocross bike it works very nicely.
Does the VFR have much forward movement on the rear hub , reason I ask if the rear end does squat easier I may have issue also on chain adjustment, just wondering if there's enough forward movement to start out new chain a link shorter?
Also are these rear hubs greased well, how long can I go(new bike) before should tear it down and grease, I know the steering head I'm looking at doing soon
I'm enjoying all this information about suspension settings and how inferior the stock equipment is. I'm sure it will make a big difference at the track. However, I can take my bike with stock suspension and factory settings and drag the crap out of the pegs. I can jack up the preload for better ground clearance and still drag the crap out of the pegs. I don't normally choose to ride that agressively, but the bike is ready for the occasions that I do. I feel that most of us aren't capable of riding the stock suspension to it's fullest, especially me. Yet the suspension hasn't caused me to wad the bike or to feel like I am about to. The main reason I see for aftermarket parts is for serious track days and people who have ample supply of body mass. Oh, and also for guys who just like to tinker.
My understanding is that most 'tuners' like to work with rear ride height instead of changing front ride height. I'm not exactly sure why.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I asked that question a while ago...I wasn't sure why most raised the tail because it made more sense to me to try and lower the center of gravity. The only answer I came up with is the threat of dragging parts. (I found out that quickly when experimenting...I have aftermarket pegs, so that was not a problem but I did drag the header a few times when I had the bike too low!!)
SAFE-T, on Mar 1 2006, 02:33 AM, said:
I can get my bike setup for $40, which I consider far superior to the guess-and-by-golly method.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I agree with what you say, but with the $40 suspension set up, won't they just look on a chart for your height, weight and riding style then 'plug' in the settings? (Was it you that commented in a post a while back about the 'feel'?) I wanted to learn and 'feel' what was happening with the changes made. With that, I started changing settings and ride heights so that I could really come to know what is going on. My changes have ranged from the stock heights to dropping the front 30mm (the max before the forks would hit the lower clamp) and even changing the rear ride height from -5 to +15mm. I played around with it a lot...pretty much every combination moving in 5mm increments. I did find the point where some stability was lost and started to get some headshake at higher speeds. It has taken me several months of expreimentation and the settings I have now I'm sure are not right for all, but it 'feels' spot on for me. I have learned a lot about the effects of my suspension setup ~ if I feel something off, I now know what to change to correct it ~ something I would not have with the $40 setup!
(I don't hear anyone flame'in BENSV for his guess-and-by-golly method on the pcIII ~ why is suspension different? Have to learn somehow!) :P
:offtopic:
Ok...trying to get back on topic...here is a link for sss conversions on other bikes. I especially like the RC51!!!
Safe-T, thanks for pointing out that the SSSA is only 12% heavier. For the real-world benefits, that's one area where I don't mind my VFR being a bit heavier than the "competition", even if I do wish it looked like MV Agusta's. <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Brendan Guy is putting an MV swingarm on his Mutant Viffer:
http://guukan.org/vfr/swingarm/swingarm-Images/8.jpg border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I was wondering just last night if this had ever been tried. Love to hear and see how that works out!
Don't be thinking I was bashing you guys for messing with the bike.
I just tend to be skeptical about people talking about slow turn-in, etc.. if they're not racing.
IME most people I've met who say that have too much technique left to work on before they really can start blaming the bike. Stick an expert racer on your bike and all of a sudden it can magically be flicked over in 1/2 the time you can. Just my bias based on real life.
Brendan Guy is putting an MV swingarm on his Mutant Viffer:
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
That is awesome!!
benSV, on Mar 1 2006, 01:18 PM, said:
Don't be thinking I was bashing you guys for messing with the bike.
I just tend to be skeptical about people talking about slow turn-in, etc.. if they're not racing.
IME most people I've met who say that have too much technique left to work on before they really can start blaming the bike. Stick an expert racer on your bike and all of a sudden it can magically be flicked over in 1/2 the time you can. Just my bias based on real life.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I really didn't think that anyone was bashing for messing with the bike...I guess my point is that people should not be afraid to try changing the settings so they can learn about what they do. In the end, some gained knowledge and the high possibility of getting the bike more tuned for their personal needs! Great point about people blaming the bike..I am in no way saying that others should make a super-flickable bike; I am encouraging others to learn and set the bike up for what 'feels' right for them.
Kind of like with the PCIII...if you had not started messing with it and just stuck with the suggested settings...you would not have ended up with the awesome map and PCIII knowledge (that I wish I had! ~ still learning from you!)
Personally I've just been more cautious about the suspension since there are so many variables that interact with each other and it's very hard to mess with them independently.
One thing though is most people do need to mess with the preload... that can have a huge effect on the turn in and lots of people with VFRs that I've met IRL have never even thought to touch the preload.
With the $40 suspension set up, won't they just look on a chart for your height, weight and riding style then 'plug' in the settings?
For $40 RMR Suspension will set sag, check geometry front and rear, and provide baseline compression/rebound settings based on my bike and riding style.
I just tend to be skeptical about people talking about slow turn-in, etc.. if they're not racing.
IME most people I've met who say that have too much technique left to work on before they really can start blaming the bike. Stick an expert racer on your bike and all of a sudden it can magically be flicked over in 1/2 the time you can. Just my bias based on real life.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yeeess... that's true. But if you've ridden something more 'flickable', like a 2005 CBR600RR, then you know the VFR's not the epitome of good handling, not by a long shot, though it is stable and well-mannered.
You can also achieve better handling in other ways. I've found my VFR handles better with the tyres kept at the recommended pressures - a bit low, and the front wanders, especially on the coarse-chip seal the raodmakers here like to use. Also, going to a different profile tyre made a big difference - the steeering is much lighter and tip-in is quicker with the AV49-SP on the front than it was with the BT-020. But the bike still tends to understeeer on corners, because the steering geometry hasn't changed. I think the forks have no more adjustment left in them, heigh-wise, and I've yet to shim the rear shock, and don't know if I will. I think working on convincing the accountant/wife/co-pilot a suspension upgrade is necessary would be better use of my time and effort.
Buell's solution for those that don't know
Good photo of what buell has done, just can't visualize it on a chain, much less the vfr's chain.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
There is (or at least, was) a similar thing for dirt bikes, using a tensioned arm and urethane wheel like those on rollerskates. It wouldn't be necessary if Honda had taken full advantage of the engine case-mounted swingarm to put the sprocket and swingarm pivot on the same axis. I guess it would make sprocket access too hard or summat.
Yeeess... that's true. But if you've ridden something more 'flickable', like a 2005 CBR600RR, then you know the VFR's not the epitome of good handling, not by a long shot, though it is stable and well-mannered.
Yes of course but the difference is still smaller then riding skill. I can swap bikes at the track with one of my friends who has a racebike. With me on the racebike and them on the VFR they will still flick the bike harder & faster then I am capable of doing on their lighter racebike. And lots of those are just as stable as the VFR, the reason they may seem less stable is their front wheels don't like to stay on the ground. :D
Quote
You can also achieve better handling in other ways. I've found my VFR handles better with the tyres kept at the recommended pressures - a bit low, and the front wanders, especially on the coarse-chip seal the raodmakers here like to use. Also, going to a different profile tyre made a big difference - the steeering is much lighter and tip-in is quicker with the AV49-SP on the front than it was with the BT-020. But the bike still tends to understeeer on corners, because the steering geometry hasn't changed. I think the forks have no more adjustment left in them, heigh-wise, and I've yet to shim the rear shock, and don't know if I will. I think working on convincing the accountant/wife/co-pilot a suspension upgrade is necessary would be better use of my time and effort.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Something just sounds wrong. I've had two VTECs and I took a 50 mile ride on a 5th gen before deciding to get the VTEC. None of the bikes have had an understeer effect, when everything is right with suspension & tires they turn in perfectly and hold a line perfectly with no steering input. And I can run anything from 30psi in the tires for the track up to the stock pressures and the steering will still feel pretty much the same. I don't think you're seeing something that should be considered normal for the VFR with stock suspension geometry. I have experienced that effect on other bikes and I have experienced it on the VFR when the sag heights were not correct, but considering I am within the stock weight ranges for the suspension there has been no issue with an "understeer" effect. The VFR is heavier and has a more relaxed geometry then race reps but it also has very wide clipons, giving you tons of leverage, which makes the bike handle quite light.
I have also seen on certain occassions a mental block definitely making the bike feel like it is understeering when it's totally in my head. And the VFRs weight makes itself felt when you're turning in on an off camber surface.
One of the biggest things everyone can do to quicken turn-in is just make sure you are not on the throttle as you make your turn in. The VFRs abrupt EFI for the 5th and 6th gen bikes encourages a style of riding where you get all your braking done in a straight line and then crack the throttle while the bike is still straight up, then turn in and slowly open the throttle as you move through the corner, avoiding a jerky throttle response from making the initial throttle change while leaned over.
But if you turn at the same time your are cracking the throttle the forks are still compressed from braking/slowing the bike and the bike will turn much more rapidly since the geometry has changed. This is standard race/track technique of course with racers pushing the opening of the throttle as far towards the apex as possible but it works fine in varying degrees with the VFR as well, and shows one reason why there is a big benefit to smoothing out the throttle response.
The longer I go on the street in between track days the more and more conservative I get in terms of when to crack open the throttle. As I get more and more conservative it will of course make the bike feel more and more slow to turn in.
Something just sounds wrong. I've had two VTECs and I took a 50 mile ride on a 5th gen before deciding to get the VTEC. None of the bikes have had an understeer effect, when everything is right with suspension & tires they turn in perfectly and hold a line perfectly with no steering input.
...
I have also seen on certain occassions a mental block definitely making the bike feel like it is understeering when it's totally in my head. And the VFRs weight makes itself felt when you're turning in on an off camber surface.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yeah, maybe that's it. It's not always feeling like it's understeering, so I need to check what else is going on. I suspect it's more likely to be what I'm doing with the throttle, where my focus is (where I'm looking), and what the road's like (probably off-camber). More than likely, it's just particular corners that are like this, as I had no problems a while back when I road some of the nicest roads in NZ with three guys on Blackbirds. I found in the tight stuff, I could've gone faster than them, and with a little more room, could've gone up the inside on corners (if I was crazy). As it was, I was catching up on every corner, and taking a much smaller radius through the curves.
After starting this thread I got too busy with work. Wow there has been like hundred posts on it.
1) "Who cares about old race bikes." ??? A lot of us do!! One of the cool things about the VFR is its racing roots.
2) I was hoping to see some right-side rear tire shots showing off nicely polished /painted wheels, after market exhausts and such.
3) With some extra pre-load on the rear shock and lowered front the VFR is pretty flickable, and holds its line real well. At least for most street riding. If you want more, get an Ohlins rear shock and have your forks rebuilt. $$$$. If thats not cutting it, go buy a supersport, like an R6 or CBR600. If the 7th gen VFR came with a conventional dual sided swing-arm and weighed 10 lbs less would you be happy? I wouldn't.
3) With some extra pre-load on the rear shock and lowered front the VFR is pretty flickable, and holds its line real well. At least for most street riding. If you want more, get an Ohlins rear shock and have your forks rebuilt. $$$$. If thats not cutting it, go buy a supersport, like an R6 or CBR600. If the 7th gen VFR came with a conventional dual sided swing-arm and weighed 10 lbs less would you be happy? I wouldn't.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I did just that...got the ohlins and forks being done Saturday. Not with the intent to make it more flickable, just so get better ride quality, handling and don't have to dial in my preload to the max and still by shy on what I need.
I must be thinking backwards with regards to preload. I always thought dialing in more preload, would LOWER the bike, as in my nieve thinking I assume you are compressing (thus lowering) the bike. Explanations to clear this up for me?
When I first got my viffer, i decided to ride it with the factory settings for the first month, and see what I thougth of it. I would get out and ride, and I found that it seemed that way too much "jolt" if you will was being trasferred to me through the front end, and it felt that the back end was just really "vague" to explain it in my own way.
I started looking around and researched about suspensions and how to adjust, what to adjust, and finally found out what I needed to know. I am 5'11" and around 210-225 (winter weight, have to keep warm). I found that I really wished the bike had more adjusability, but that with my preload set to 3 bars up front and 4 out of 7 in the back, the bike handles great.
I no longer got seriously "jolted" when hitting bumps, andhe back end seemed to handle more the way I wanted. The front end quit chattering, and the back end wanted to track better.
Now, I might have been going about this the wrong way, so any thoughts on it are appreciated, but I can also get the bike over in a heartbeat, and ride the crap out of it until I am sliding the back end and dragging metal underneath.
I must be thinking backwards with regards to preload. I always thought dialing in more preload, would LOWER the bike, as in my nieve thinking I assume you are compressing (thus lowering) the bike. Explanations to clear this up for me?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Yes, you are compressing the spring slightly. But don't forget that the collar is ramped, so the more you turn it, the larger the spacer you are placing between the spring and the shock body. If the shock wasn't in the bike, or had no load on it, then turning the preload makes no difference: the shock can't extend any further than its 'at rest' length.
What you are effectively doing is stiffening it by pre-loading it; as a spring is compressed, it effectively loses some ability to be compressed further. So, the more you compress it, the stiffer its action becomes.
With no preload at all, when you sit on the bike it will sink down further from its static position, than it would if you'd already dialled in some preload. The final resting position will probably be approximately the same either way.
I think.
Now, I might have been going about this the wrong way, so any thoughts on it are appreciated, <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
When you dial-in more preload, the bike's (sagging) lowering when you sit on it is reduced. This leads to slightly taller effective seat height but nothing major and for riders above 5' 9 barely noticable on the VFR.
With more preload it takes a larger amount of force to displace bike downward. The spring properties are not changed but it takes a larger amount of force before the spring is further compressed.
When I first got my VFR I had the rear-shock on the default setting (I think #2). I weigh about 190lbs. When I would roll-on throttle out of corners, the rear would sink upsetting overall geometry and requiring stronger push on the front to keep line. (when the rear goes down the bike wants to steer slower = run wide). Bumpring preload up by 2 clicks made a world of difference. The bike overall seems more planted.
Putting on lots of preload to keep the rear up can overstiffen the rear suspension action which lessens compliance which can then affect traction. That's why I think raising the ride height by shimming or extending the shock and avoiding overstiffening the ride is a better way to go. than just adding preload. You maintain the quick geometry without the jarring ride.
JMO
OK, to take this thread back OT (SSS, not suspension tweaks) - I just answered a question on the OzVFR forum and thought the content would fit in here, and maybe answer a few unasked questions :)
Quote
So in the normal course of adjusting the chain, you would start with the lobe of the cam at 9 o'clock giving the shortest distance. As the chain wears you turn the adjuster up towards 12 o'clock through to the maximum at 3 o'clock. During this cycle you will have raised & lowered the ride height by 15mm, so if raising the front forks 6mm is supposed to significantly alter the handling, does this have the same effect?
To answer the question, you definitely will change ride height during the life of the chain, but during the course of adjustment the ride height will DECREASE not increase.
Cam is not really the right term for the adjustment mechanism - it's an eccentric:
The effective range of the adjustment in the eccentric is from roughly 10-2 o'clock. The extra 'hour' on each side provides a bit of headspace to ensure that you don't run out of range, although a seriously worn chain will see the eccentric at 3 o'clock and the chain will still be slack. But it's the initial range (9-10 o'clock) that's important.
So. For our example, 10 o'clock is the new chain fitted position. As the chain elongates over time, you'll have to rotate the eccentric to pull the axle/sprocket towards the rear of the bike to maintain correct tension. So at 11 o'clock, the axle will now sit higher in the hub. At 12 o'clock it's higher again, by maybe 8-10mm from the original 10 o'clock position.
But the axle itself is still exactly the same distance from the road - so it's the hub that is moving (and by extension the swingarm). If the axle is not going up, then of course the swingarm is going down. Therefore the rear height of the bike is now 8-10mm lower than when we fitted the new chain.
At 1 o'clock the axle is theoretically on the way down again, but of course we know that it's actually the hub/swingarm on the way back up. So ride height is increasing now as we are nearing the end of life of the chain.
While all this is going on the wheelbase is slowly getting longer, and won't get shorter again until a new chain is fitted.
So, you do get geometry changes that will affect handling in subtle ways. But it's minimal and variable over time, so dropping the forks down the triples (AKA raising the forks) is still the best way to tangibly alter the handling characteristics for more 'sport' than tour.
If you mod the bike in order to be able to 'flip' the eccentric (or you have one of the Third Gen VFR750s that already have countersunk brake flange bolts, not all of them do), you still use the same theory but the eccentric range will be from 8 o'clock, anticlockwise through to 4 o'clock. This does increase rear ride height as the chain wears, and this increase is compounded by the fact that, by starting at 8 o'clock, you're already that much higher in the rear (lower in the eccentric) than by starting at 10 o'clock. Real world difference is around 32-35mm (basically the distance between the axle centre at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock)...
If a VFR owner is truly sensitive enough to be bothered by the range of geometry alteration that takes place through the life of a chain, they'll just have to buy a new one every few months or get into the habit of fiddling with shims and fork heights.
For most of us, the SSSA's simple chain adjustment and always-aligned axle thrust more than make up for any idiosyncracies.
Interesting side note: My concentric adjuster is at its tightest after turning through the bottom arc counter-clockwise (anticlockwise for those of you who spell correctly :goofy: ) until it reaches about 4 o'clock (yes, I know, my chain is completely wasted). If that's really not the way 5th gens are designed, the previous owner must have flipped the adjuster :blink:
To answer the question, you definitely will change ride height during the life of the chain, but during the course of adjustment the ride height will DECREASE not increase.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Not necessarily...
The shop manual prescribes the number of links of 530 chain... and with the
prescribed links of chain Honda designed the eccentric so the axle rest in the vicinity
of the 6 O clock position... if you added teeth to your rear sprocket... then you may
need to add two links of chain... I say two links because it's impossible to just add
one link of chain... your number of chain links will always be a even number...
http://www.vfrdiscussion.com/forum/uploads/1112757922/gallery_3131_51_13087.jpg border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Now you keep adjusting the chain with an eye to the wear label on the swingarm... a
new chain starts in the green zone and wears into the red zone... at which point the
chain is deemed wore out and must be replaced... about 5mm is the range between
the green and the red zone... and I have indicated that 5mm range in the pic below
with two green lines... you'll notice that adjusting range still not enough to drastically
affect ride height... of course it depends on the fact that your axle rest correctly at
the 6 O clock position...
http://www.fox302.com/userdata/netters2/files/ShopPics/RC45TireSwingarmGap.JPG border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Larry, what's happening with your HRC kit swingarm?
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
My HRC kit swingarm is just collecting dust right now... I need a engineering drawing of
the pro links that connect the swingarm to the shock... my RC45 friends in Europe have
the information but I've been to busy to bug them about my problem...
http://www.fox302.com/userdata/netters2/files/ShopPics/Mr.RC45HRCSwingarm.JPG border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Who cares about old racebikes. The RC30/45 all probably get schooled by today's stock 1000RR anyway.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I love this line of thought... because out on the open road when RC45 leads the pack of
the Latest Motors of Death... that line of thought shifts onto shakey ground as they
begin to wonder... what's up with the old 94 bike??? they don't realize that Honda
is not making bikes on the level of the RC30 / RC45... too expensive...
When I swap rides I realize that the new bikes are getting better... but they are still off
the mark of a true homologated racer... read more here... RC45 / VFR800 / NR750 Essential Superbike scans
http://www.vfrdiscussion.com/forum/uploads/1112757922/gallery_3131_51_13087.jpg border='0' alt='user posted image' />
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this picture we're seeing an RC45 concentric, which tightens the chain by a counterclockwise rotation toward 3 o'clock. Was the preceding info indicating a rotation from 10-2 o'clock incorrect, or did Honda play with exceptions to the rule?
Clearly, the bike's ride height in Larry's pic would be highest at 6 o'clock and would drop slightly as it reached 4 o'clock. The effect on handling might be perceptible to a World Superbike racer, but not to me!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this picture we're seeing an RC45 concentric, which tightens the chain by a counterclockwise rotation toward 3 o'clock. Was the preceding info indicating a rotation from 10-2 o'clock incorrect, or did Honda play with exceptions to the rule?
Clearly, the bike's ride height in Larry's pic would be highest at 6 o'clock and would drop slightly as it reached 4 o'clock. The effect on handling might be perceptible to a World Superbike racer, but not to me!
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It is an RC45 concentric but all of Honda's concentrics were designed to work in the
same fashion... and to clock your axle in any other position is out of spec... check your
shop manual...
All of Honda's concentrics were designed to work in the
same fashion... and to clock your axle in any other position is out of spec...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
So, with a new chain in place, the starting position for the axle should be approx. 6 o'clock, with later adjustments moving counterclockwise until a fully stretched chain takes you to about the 3 o'clock position.
Is that right, BLS? I haven't really looked at this on the bike since I started following this thread. When I get a new chain I'm sure I'll find out for myself.
So, with a new chain in place, the starting position for the axle should be approx. 6 o'clock, with later adjustments moving counterclockwise until a fully stretched chain takes you to about the 3 o'clock position.
Is that right, BLS? I haven't really looked at this on the bike since I started following this thread. When I get a new chain I'm sure I'll find out for myself.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
With a new chain the starting position is indeed approx 6 o'clock and a full worn out
chain should only move the axle between the 5 and 6 o'clock positions... it's not possible
to get the axle all the over to the 3 o'clock position... mercy... you'd have to wear down
the pins in your chain to the size of tooth picks... 8-)
Putting on lots of preload to keep the rear up can overstiffen the rear suspension action which lessens compliance which can then affect traction. That's why I think raising the ride height by shimming or extending the shock and avoiding overstiffening the ride is a better way to go. than just adding preload. You maintain the quick geometry without the jarring ride.
JMO
Beck
95 VFR
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I completely agree. Putting extra preload to your rear shock is not the thing to do if you are trying to change your riding geometry. For a quicker steering geomery you either lower the front or raise the rear - not by suspension adjustments. For those having ground clearance problems, raising the rear is the better way of the two. For shorties like myself, lowering the front might make more sense.
How much preload you want is really a matter of preference and is very subjective. Its impact on overall handling will be a matter of feel and how you like to ride. It does make it harder to steer if your sag is not set up properly, and too soft rear will make it hard to hold a line when rolling on out of a corner, just like too firm rear shock will give a jarring ride.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in this picture we're seeing an RC45 concentric, which tightens the chain by a counterclockwise rotation toward 3 o'clock. Was the preceding info indicating a rotation from 10-2 o'clock incorrect, or did Honda play with exceptions to the rule?
Aha! I hadn't thought about this till now. The 800 is different to the 750, for the simple reason that the rear brake caliper is _under_ the swingarm (like the RC45) rather than on top of it as with the 750.
So the 800 _already_ has a 'flipped eccentric'... I know that the swingarm is of quite different design to the 750s (the Gen 3 and Gen 4 are also different) so Honda probably dialed out any major geometry differences when they repositioned the pivot point (my guess is that it is higher than on the 750s).
BLS is correct, then, in saying that 6 o'clock is the start position, but only on the 800s... the 750s start at 11/12 o'clock.
Interesting... there really isn't much scope for ride height change on the 800 unless you change the shock or dogbone.
Interesting... there really isn't much scope for ride height change on the 800 unless you change the shock or dogbone.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
On a related note...
My wife and I took a ride on Saturday and I found to my chagrin that coming out of a bumpy corner under full throttle, the tire hit my underseat muffler (barely). I didn't want to add any more preload, since I was already at the second-to-the-last notch (for two-up riding). So I took the shock out, added three 1/2" flat washers (a stack almost 3/8" thick)at the top and reinstalled . I had to use Lok-tite on the top nut because the stud threads didn't quite reach the nylon on the lock-nut, but I had plenty of thread.
The effective lift at the tire ended up being almost 3/4", and I was able to lighten up on the preload and get some feel back. Haven't test-ridden two-up yet, but I think we should be fine now. I'm also interested in how the change in steering geometry will feel.
BLS is correct, then, in saying that 6 o'clock is the start position, but only on the 800s... the 750s start at 11/12 o'clock.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Phantom... I believe the 750s are like the 800s and that the eccentric is designed to rest
at the 6 o' clock position... check your shop manual... the only thing I have to go by is
Ron Ayers...
Phantom... I believe the 750s are like the 800s and that the eccentric is designed to rest at the 6 o' clock position... check your shop manual... the only thing I have to go by is Ron Ayers...
No need to check my manual, I flipped my eccentric a couple of years ago :thumbsup: They are definitely at 12 o'clock on the 750s. There are two bolt heads that hold the rear caliper bracket (to which the caliper itself is mounted) onto the flange that goes between the swingarm and the rear brake rotor. When you attempt to rotate the eccentric any lower than about 4 o'clock (rotating clockwise), one of the boltheads hits the swingarm.
Countersinking the hole and fitting a set screw allows full 360 degree rotation. And here is a pic of the countersunk bolt courtesy of JZH on hondavfrclub.org - I countersunk both of mine for uniformity but have no pics of it. You can just see it peeking over the top of the swingarm - if it was the original bolt the axle could not be in the 6 o'clock position.
Because the 800 runs the rear brake caliper underneath the swingarm, the set-up is reversed - but I don't have any pics to show this. I assume it's the same layout, with the bracket flange that has the caliper bracket bolted to it. Perhaps there is the potential there to actually _lower_ an 800 using a similar method, for those with ducks disease? : )
Magellan, I did the mod for the same reason, to gain clearance for the Wolf underseat pipes. I've also got some shims for the shock, and have cut the subframe a bit to get the pipes as high as possible - so now I think I'll be able to run the eccentric in the 'normal' position with one or two shims when solo, and will just flip the eccentric (all of 30 seconds work) when my better half is on the back seat.
No need to check my manual, I flipped my eccentric a couple of years ago :thumbsup: They are definitely at 12 o'clock on the 750s. There are two bolt heads that hold the rear caliper bracket (to which the caliper itself is mounted) onto the flange that goes between the swingarm and the rear brake rotor. When you attempt to rotate the eccentric any lower than about 4 o'clock (rotating clockwise), one of the boltheads hits the swingarm.
Countersinking the hole and fitting a set screw allows full 360 degree rotation. And here is a pic of the countersunk bolt courtesy of JZH on hondavfrclub.org - I countersunk both of mine for uniformity but have no pics of it. You can just see it peeking over the top of the swingarm - if it was the original bolt the axle could not be in the 6 o'clock position.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Good pics... thanks for pointing that out... I see now where Honda had no chance in
positioning the axle 6 o' clock due to bolt interference... weird... so how did flipping
the eccentric affect handling???
I like the countersunk idea... I think that would have been my solution as well...
So I took the shock out, added three 1/2" flat washers (a stack almost 3/8" thick)at the top and reinstalled.
...
I'm also interested in how the change in steering geometry will feel.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Magellan,
Take care. This 3/8" sounds like a LOT of change at the rear shock. I've generally heard half that amount is used to improve turn in. Your steering should be much, much quicker (twitchier), if I'm correct.
Good pics... thanks for pointing that out... I see now where Honda had no chance in
positioning the axle 6 o' clock due to bolt interference... weird... so how did flipping
the eccentric affect handling???
I like the countersunk idea... I think that would have been my solution as well...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I did it some years ago on my 4:th gen, but the frontmost side of the shock made contact with the swingarm when fully extended - didn't like that. Also, the increased height made the center stand almost unusable and when using the side stand the bike leaned over too much for my liking. I ended up shimming the rear shock 1/4 in and raising the forks a tad more than 1/2 in instead.
Didn't ride it enough with just the eccenter flip to make a real good evaluation but I never experienced any headshaking. The stock 4:th gen is incredibly stable.
There is a good pictorial from some years back on the UK site. JZH, that you've propably met on VFRd, was involved in it.
And then to the topic of quick steering. At least I make a sharp distiction between quick- and over-steering. I don't hear anybody talking about that here.
Take care.? This 3/8" sounds like a LOT of change at the rear shock.? I've generally heard half that amount is used to improve turn in.? Your steering should be much, much quicker (twitchier), if I'm correct.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Depends on whether we're talking about a VTX1800 or a ZX-10R. The VTX you could raise the rear probably 2 inches without a problem (assuming it's physically doable).
On the Tenner, yeah, a few mm would make a world of difference and possibly upset the stability of the machine.
But the VFR has such lazy geometry compared to cutting-edge sportbikes like the CBR's and Ninjas, R-series Yammies, etc, that what would be considered a large change on that bike doesn't upset the VFR and it's still quite stable afterwards.
I shimmed my stock rear shock to nearly what Magellan has done without any ill effects.
But you have to remember to run greater chain slack when measured on the centerstand as the swingarm has more downangle and the chain will be too tight when the suspension compresses if you continue to use the factory recommended slack settings.
Good pics... thanks for pointing that out... I see now where Honda had no chance in
positioning the axle 6 o' clock due to bolt interference... weird... so how did flipping
the eccentric affect handling???
I like the countersunk idea... I think that would have been my solution as well...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
On the third generation, the bolts didn't interfere with rotating the eccentric. On my '90, I had the front forks raised a little, and then flipped the eccentric after a couple of years. It made a perceptible difference to height, in that the rear tyre touched the ground when on the centrestand, whereas previously it was nearly an inch clear, but not a huge difference in handling. Just a little bit quicker, and had less tendency to run wide in corners.
Here is a pic of my polished swingarm with some Ducati parts...
http://www.vfrdiscussion.com/forum/uploads/1107240550/gallery_654_61_11688.jpg border='0' alt='user posted image' /> Modified a Ducati rear brake stay and the VFR torque rod
My HRC kit swingarm is just collecting dust right now... I need a engineering drawing of
the pro links that connect the swingarm to the shock... my RC45 friends in Europe have
the information but I've been to busy to bug them about my problem...
http://www.fox302.com/userdata/netters2/files/ShopPics/Mr.RC45HRCSwingarm.JPG border='0' alt='user posted image' />
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Is this the one I found on ebay??? The $1800.00 swingarm for $200.00??? If it is, I thought you would have put that thing to use ages ago...
Is this the one I found on ebay??? The $1800.00 swingarm for $200.00??? If it is, I thought you would have put that thing to use ages ago...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
It sure is the one you found on Ebay... I owe you one for pointing it out...
It sure is the one you found on Ebay... I owe you one for pointing it out...
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I only hope e-bay is as good to me when I find something I really need. Still trying to amass parts for this '91 project...
Take care. This 3/8" sounds like a LOT of change at the rear shock. I've generally heard half that amount is used to improve turn in. Your steering should be much, much quicker (twitchier), if I'm correct.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
I appreciate the concern and will be careful on my first decent ride with the shims in place. I decreased the preload by 4 notches, however, so that will help balance the front trail deficit. I can always pull a shim out if necessary, but I'm betting it should be stable enough as is (I used to ride a CBR900RR, so I doubt I'm in too much trouble here).
But you have to remember to run greater chain slack when measured on the centerstand as the swingarm has more downangle and the chain will be too tight when the suspension compresses if you continue to use the factory recommended slack settings.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Mmmm, I'll be right back... Gotta go loosen a chain :unsure:
BLS, I take it you aren't familiar with the ongoing saga of The Phantom :lol: The name is a clue - OzVFR christened it after many moons went by with no appearance of my VFR from the workshop... the bike is still not finished... I have an email from Safe-T from 2002 asking "so, did you ever finish painting your bike?"... so can't comment on the handling with the flipped eccentric.
Quote
There is a good pictorial from some years back on the UK site. JZH, that you've propably met on VFRd, was involved in it.
Yep, that's where I got the pics I linked to. I was there while it was going on (JZH and I were corresponding a lot about underseat exhaust fitment) and decided to do mine at the same time. The entire thread is still online here.
But you have to remember to run greater chain slack when measured on the centerstand as the swingarm has more downangle and the chain will be too tight when the suspension compresses if you continue to use the factory recommended slack settings.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
If I am not mistaken, the manual says to put the bike ON the centerstand to measure and adjust the chain. Why would they do that if it is not the correct way to do it? Enlighten me as to what the manual says, what you set yours at, why etc.
If I am not mistaken, the manual says to put the bike ON the centerstand to measure and adjust the chain. Why would they do that if it is not the correct way to do it? Enlighten me as to what the manual says, what you set yours at, why etc.
<{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Only applicable if you have modified your rear suspension geometry.
When you shim the rear shock, you are lowering the rear sprocket relative to the swingarm pivot point - this increases the distance between the two. Therefore if you set your chain tension with the shock fully extended (i.e. on the centrestand), when the shock is compressed again the distance between swingarm pivot and rear sprocket will reduce - meaning too much chain slack.
seems to me the angle of the rear sprocket relative to the pivot point has nothing to do with shimming the shock. At rest, with the tire on the ground, the angle is exactly the same on the swingarm.
Seems the angle would only increase, like you say, when the tire is off the ground as you has "lowered" the top of the shock so to speak by shimming.
Are my scenarios accurate here? Is the second paragraph what you are saying? Sorry to be such a mechanical dweeb here but I am trying to learn.
seems to me the angle of the rear sprocket relative to the pivot point has nothing to do with shimming the shock. At rest, with the tire on the ground, the angle is exactly the same on the swingarm.
Yep. My statement "you are lowering the rear sprocket relative to the swingarm pivot point" is a bit misleading, I should have added "when the bike is on the centrestand".
Quote
Seems the angle would only increase, like you say, when the tire is off the ground as you has "lowered" the top of the shock so to speak by shimming.
Yep.
Backtracking a bit - the reason we're VFRd'ing this is because V800C said:
Quote
But you have to remember to run greater chain slack when measured on the centerstand as the swingarm has more downangle and the chain will be too tight when the suspension compresses if you continue to use the factory recommended slack settings.
[image: View Post]BusyLittleShop, on Feb 28 2006, 01:20 PM, said:
Honda experimented with a DSS dual sided swingarm on the RC45 but did not adopt it
citing no clear advantage over the cast magnesium single sided swingarm... you have to
remember that a cast magnesium SSS is lighter or just as light as a cast and extruded
aluminum DSS...
I think Ducati cites cost as the reason for going with a DSS after years campaigning a
SSS...
The SSS was ditched due to the newfound advantage of allowing suspension flex when leaned over. A SSS is very stiff and any flex causes wheel misalignment. A double sided swingarm, narrow but deep in section, allows for parallelogram flex movement with minimal misalignment. A corresponding flex component in the front suspension is provided by the frame rails, not the forks, also to minimize misalignment.
[image: View Post]gll429, on Jan 4 2007, 01:24 AM, said:
[image: View Post]rbertalotto, on Jan 2 2007, 02:16 PM, said:
I like SSS on the front!
Yamah GTS1000 (Bimotor also)
http://www.panix.com/~bergman/images/profile.gif
i must ad mit i want to find one of these bikes and make a really tricked out vfr 1000ssa on both ends...
Someone beat you to it already.
A guy that worked for Mission Honda/Yamaha here in San Francisco, had one with a VFR rear SSS grafted on to it. I used to see it parked in front of that motorcycle store till about two years ago, every day. Looks like it's gone now or the guy quit working there. I hope the bike is still in one piece somwhere, cause it looked great.
http://www.vfrdiscussion.com/forum/public/style_images/clean/snapback.png' alt='View Post' />jeremy556, on Jan 4 2007, 03:15 PM, said:
[image: View Post]enzed_viffer, on Jan 3 2007, 09:11 PM, said:
[image: View Post]jeremy556, on Jan 4 2007, 02:53 PM, said:
Very nice hub, but that weld in the middle of the swingarm desperately needs a grinder taken to it!
Yea, really wish that weld was not there, but oh well.
Guess what?!?
I went to visit my friend/bike guy Kerry yesterday, and he said he's getting some new Ducatis, before they're officially released in New Zealand! The Ducati dealers here are going to be pissed off! He's bringing in a 1098, the new ST4S, and the new Mostro (or Monster, if you prefer English), via Japan. :thumbsup:
Sorry, the GTS1000 with VFR SSS has already been done. Looks way cool, too. I didn't do it, but it's still cool.
NO NO NO NO NO!! :pissed:
read!!
i want a a VFR 1000 with the front from the yamaha!!! and the back from a 750... !
this is not the same as a yamahhhahahaha with vfr ssa!!
i want the bastard v4!!!! :lol: :P
Beemer.........
http://i113.photobucket.com/albums/n206/Dutchy_748/HPIM3785.jpg
Spotted in Barcelona;
BTW, didnot see a SINGLE VFR in the 4 days I was there.... ;)
[image: View Post]benSV, on Mar 1 2006, 04:15 AM, said:
Are you sure the rear wheel clanking around has anything to do with the higher unsprung weight of the SSA and isn't just the craptacular nature of the VFRs stock shock or it's linkage design?
Not absolutely sure. This comes from two things: reading a review by some bike mag ("Two Wheels"?) on the VFR750, where they commented on the feel of the rear wheel, and then my own experience, where I test-rode a CBR600RR then hopped on my 800, and when I first bought the VFR800, after riding to the dealers on my VTR1000.
I wouldn't have said that the VTR1000's rear shock was any better than the VFR800's, but I'd be willing to bet that the swingarm is lighter, and even if it's not, the mass centred around the rear axle/hub is bound to be higher.
[image: View Post]benSV, on Mar 1 2006, 04:15 AM, said:
There are plenty of Ducs and Triumphs that have a much more supple rear end despite having the SSA design.
I bet their SSSAs are lighter, and that the hubs are too. They certainly look slimmer, as do the MV ones.
I bet their SSSAs are lighter, and that the hubs are too. They certainly look slimmer, as do the MV ones.
It's easy to forget that Honda, unlike most other manufacturers, builds their bikes to LAST... as nice as a lighter VFR would be, you'd end up with Suzuki levels of longevity. It would be interesting to know how many 10 year old VFRs are still on the road vs. how many 10 year old GSX-Rs (with totals adjusted to reflect the larger volume of GSX-Rs sold, of course).
I think the VFR will continue to wear a SSS - as material quality and design improves, Honda will be able to make it stronger and lighter, and it's most definitely a signature feature of the VFR. I'd like to see it restyled, though - it looks quite plain these days compared to what's appearing on other (mostly Italian) bikes.