Jump to content

Recommended Posts

That sounds insane. Not saying it's false, just absolutely weird. If it altered ride height and/or spring/damping curve, I could understand it. But I cannot see how it's possible to flip the damper characteristics other than making it more or less progressive. Could be I have stuff to learn.

 

I worded it wrongly as i was just about to sleep when i typed it out;

 

Hotfoot is right, it alters the geometry of the bike too...

 

and flips the progressive characteristrics of the whole progressive link system (not the shock but the characteristics of the links that connects to the shocks , think changing the pivot point on a see saw, but 100X more complicated, engineers usually use CAD to simulate a part)

 

the shock's characteristics will remain the same but as a whole system, the characteristics will be "flipped" towards oversteer at low speeds and just the right amount of steer at race speeds.

 

Stock systems (link steup + rear suspension height) are usually tuned for 90% road speeds, so its just the right amount of steer at road legal speeds and understeer at race speeds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, as per the pic I posted, you turn the small eccentric upside down. This forces the back of the bike up about 4mm or so, which I believe results in a 1mm change in trail. So you get a bit faster steering at the expense of some "stability". As I mentioned, when I had it set this way, the bike just wanted to fall into corners, which is super for track, not-so-super for street, such as a slow turn onto a side street, etc. I've not experimented with this since then, but I probably should revisit at some point. But I have too many other things to work on that don't involve the bike (i.e. my skill set).

 

(or are different people talking about different thing here?)

 

HRC figured it out in the NSR500 days... a higher rear will result in a more flipable bike at the expense of stability at lower speeds

 

here you go (honda took it down because it was and is still too damn good (esp for its competitors) , its their "secret sauce" so to speak , esp the mass centralization parts

 

imho... if you understand whats in it ... suspension wise i can already trump 90% of the other guys at my own level , but i want to get better too ):

 

http://www.risingsuncycles.com/bikespecific/suspension.htm

 

This is some hi - level stuff, i dont expect most people to understand but i do welcome those who can understand and hold a good discussion ~ this is how i improve in this aspect ^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there is so much interest in this topic, I'll share a few stories about stock bike stability versus race bike handling: In setting up my race bike (the SuperSingle, not the BMW) I dropped the front (by lowering the triple clamp on the forks) by 5mm to make the bike turn in a little quicker/easier, and I liked the change. When Will came out to help me tune the suspension, he dropped it an ADDITIONAL 10 mm (which is a lot!) to see how I liked it. I rode it and it was noticeably unstable entering the corners, the front end shuddered on entry, so we went back up 5 mm and it was perfect. So it ultimately ended up 10 mm lower than where it was when I first got it, a pretty significant change. He also shortened the wheelbase by adjusting the rear wheel - it was adjusted out almost as far as possible, so he brought it forward and took a few links out of the chain to accommodate that - and that tightened up the handling too, particularly mid-corner.

 

On my previous bike (ZX6R), I had lowered the front about 5mm or so. When I tried going farther, I got headshake exiting corners.

 

Some years ago a friend brought over a Ducati 999. It had a cool elliptical steering head on it. I tried riding the bike and found it REALLY difficult to turn, so my husband and I played with it and turned the elliptical steering head to the steeper steering angle, and it handled great after that. The owner of the bike was unaware of that adjustability and was much happier after the change. As said by others above, most bikes are set up for good stability on the street, not for quick turning on the track.

 

Not everyone likes the bikes to steer so easily - my husband does not like riding my bikes, he finds them twitchy and hard to steer smoothly, and I feel like his bike requires too much effort to turn, so personal preference definitely plays a part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not everyone likes the bikes to steer so easily - my husband does not like riding my bikes, he finds them twitchy and hard to steer smoothly, and I feel like his bike requires too much effort to turn, so personal preference definitely plays a part.

My brother prefer bikes that require a LOT of muscle to turn, I prefer bikes that are utterly nimble and neutral, bikes that doesn't require more than one steering input.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was setting up my FZR400 I lowered the front end as well and experienced the "too much of a good thing" myself. The FZR400 has a unique geometry from the factory with a 17inch front tire and an 18inch rear tire for great turn in. Lowering the front end made the bike really unstable. My test ride was very short.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One question - Is it that the bike may be too unstable for our current skill levels? As we become better riders, can we set up the bike to steer faster and faster to match the increased rider ability?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, makes the bike taller in the back, effectively making the steering angle sharper.

Alternatively, lower the front, but this will reduce your free height so you'll scrape parts quicker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CoG will also change; raised by hoisting the rear, lowered by dropping the front. Depending on where the CoG is stock, either one can make the bike slightly easier or heavier to steer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since there is so much interest in this topic, I'll share a few stories about stock bike stability versus race bike handling: In setting up my race bike (the SuperSingle, not the BMW) I dropped the front (by lowering the triple clamp on the forks) by 5mm to make the bike turn in a little quicker/easier, and I liked the change. When Will came out to help me tune the suspension, he dropped it an ADDITIONAL 10 mm (which is a lot!) to see how I liked it. I rode it and it was noticeably unstable entering the corners, the front end shuddered on entry, so we went back up 5 mm and it was perfect. So it ultimately ended up 10 mm lower than where it was when I first got it, a pretty significant change. He also shortened the wheelbase by adjusting the rear wheel - it was adjusted out almost as far as possible, so he brought it forward and took a few links out of the chain to accommodate that - and that tightened up the handling too, particularly mid-corner.

 

On my previous bike (ZX6R), I had lowered the front about 5mm or so. When I tried going farther, I got headshake exiting corners.

 

Some years ago a friend brought over a Ducati 999. It had a cool elliptical steering head on it. I tried riding the bike and found it REALLY difficult to turn, so my husband and I played with it and turned the elliptical steering head to the steeper steering angle, and it handled great after that. The owner of the bike was unaware of that adjustability and was much happier after the change. As said by others above, most bikes are set up for good stability on the street, not for quick turning on the track.

 

Not everyone likes the bikes to steer so easily - my husband does not like riding my bikes, he finds them twitchy and hard to steer smoothly, and I feel like his bike requires too much effort to turn, so personal preference definitely plays a part.

jj7kup.jpg

 

Its written inside ; some of the members here also said about scraping parts, which is an additional informative datapoint.

 

PS. as for the bolded part, a different total COG sum (because of different riders) will affect ride characteristics , even if 2 riders are the same weight, if one is short+fat and the other is tall+thin , the tune will be different :

 

hu0caw.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was setting up my FZR400 I lowered the front end as well and experienced the "too much of a good thing" myself. The FZR400 has a unique geometry from the factory with a 17inch front tire and an 18inch rear tire for great turn in. Lowering the front end made the bike really unstable. My test ride was very short.

I would have kept it stock or lowered the rear by 5MM (by more fork preload or less shock preload) for some slight understeer when getting used to a new ride imho... but thats just me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed in the announcement for next year's schedule that the fleet of school bikes will be 2015 S1000RRs. Will they have the shift assist pro (up and down)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm now remembering why the school bikes seemed to turn in better than mine. Their fork heights are set to the 4th line. Mine are on the 2nd. That's quite a difference in the front. Both are supposedly stock. Hmm. I have a 2013 and they had 2014 bikes. Could they have really changed that that much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I noticed in the announcement for next year's schedule that the fleet of school bikes will be 2015 S1000RRs. Will they have the shift assist pro (up and down)?

 

That's a good question. Typically I have noticed they get ordered with "all the extras". The school bikes I have ridden have always had the quick shifter. An interesting question is will they be ordered with DDC. DDC could potentially save some tire wear. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm now remembering why the school bikes seemed to turn in better than mine. Their fork heights are set to the 4th line. Mine are on the 2nd. That's quite a difference in the front. Both are supposedly stock. Hmm. I have a 2013 and they had 2014 bikes. Could they have really changed that that much?

 

There was no change between '13 and '14 that would have affected handling. The '15 is a new bike with different geometry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got curious and went out to check mine. My 2014 is also set to the 2nd line. Forks were removed for a full service before 600 miles by my suspension shop. They put it back in the original position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Black Night became the Furious BN since I had. Max flash tune my ecu to the Brock's titanium Meg, put the new stickiest Miches on it with my sponsored Cox rad oil cooler guards for safety strength and looks and believe me she wants to take me to places I never thought possible. The noise! Praying tech will let me pass.

I told u rchase. I want that '15 and chances r I'll ge it.

Thanks all. I'm still riding with the headmaster through my uc clear 200 comm device and crave learning more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2015 is a great bike. That new shift assist is awesome. This year's CSS is going to be a challenge for me as I'll have to look away from all of that temptation. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I got a chance to ride the new 2015 bike at CSS a week or 2 ago. Wow, what a difference from my 2013. Amazing torque curve, and don't get me started on the clutchless downshifts. Now I am thinking about upgrading. Am I crazy? Otherwise, I figure it's a lot of work and $$$ to replicate the difference I felt. At least if I get a new bike I know it was all tuned to be exactly right. If I play with things.... who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I got a chance to ride the new 2015 bike at CSS a week or 2 ago. Wow, what a difference from my 2013. Amazing torque curve, and don't get me started on the clutchless downshifts. Now I am thinking about upgrading. Am I crazy? Otherwise, I figure it's a lot of work and $$$ to replicate the difference I felt. At least if I get a new bike I know it was all tuned to be exactly right. If I play with things.... who knows.

 

Heh heh. Yeah. That's one of the reasons I have been staying far far away from the 2015's myself. You aren't crazy at all.

 

Some people like myself are keeping the "old" ones around for a while. There's a lot of things that can be done to the 14's and older that will make them just as nice (if not slightly nicer) as the 15's if you decide to keep yours around. There are 3rd party companies that sell a auto blipper unit for the S1000RR. Ohlins Suspension really helps out a lot as well as tweaking the bike's geometry. The HP power kit (Akrapovic TI Evolution exhaust + Race ECU) gives you that same nice low down in the rev band torque and also gives you more track oriented ABS and TC settings that are better than the 15's stock settings. You have to determine what suits your budget and needs the best. One of the cool things about the new 15 coming out is some of the HP race parts and aftermarket parts for the previous generation bikes are lowering in price.

 

MCN did a comparison of the 14's and 15's and the result was somewhat surprising to me at least. The old girl keeps up rather well with the new bike.

 

 

Do the math and see what you think. A set of Forged wheels and Ohlins Suspension for a bike might be a cheaper upgrade than an entire bike in the short term. You can add other bits like the HP power kit later on as your need for speed increases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah. I'm just figuring that going Ohlins and new wheels + whatever else to make it comparable is going to actually end up costing more in the end than buying a new one and selling off mine. Maybe I'm wrong. I'll have to add it all up.

 

You mentioned there's an auto-blipper out there? Any links?

 

EDIT: the other thing about getting the 2015 is that even though I could add some parts to get to the 2015s niceness (or a bit beyond), that would make it 100% track. I do like having the option right now to street it. Otherwise it kind of seems like a waste to make it sit all alone in between track days.

 

EDIT 2: I found the blipper on the interwebtubes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed. The math is the important bit. Don't forget about the accessories you have on your current bike. You will have to bring the new one up to the level that you are currently riding and that adds to the cost. Heck one of my bikes the accessories rival the value of the bike they are installed on. That's one of the reasons that my math might end up different than someone else's.

 

Yes there's a company in the UK that sells an auto-blipper for the S1000RR. It's about $1200 shipped to the USA. They outfit a lot of TT bikes. I'm considering one myself. Here's a link in the event you are curious.

 

http://www.proshift.com/

 

Speaking of links. When it comes to performance optimization of bikes the sky is the limit. I had a look through some of the Alpha Racing stuff and it was mind blowing. You can buy a Stage 4 WSBK class engine for 28K. Pure insanity. I love it!

 

http://alphaperformanceusa.com/pages/home

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...