suspension setup help
Tony
and rebound on an F4 as far as obtaining a fairly smooth ride is
concerned? the reason i'm asking is that my bike rides a bit
rough (i can see the headlight beam bounce up and down--think
riding over railroad ties but not as extreme). I've softened the
front compression 1 turn from standard and the rear comp softer by 1/2
a turn--i figure that this would give the bike more suspension travel
and thus soak up the road irregularities a bit but apparently it's not
enough. i've also stiffened front and rear rebound a bit. also,
FWIW, i weigh 127 lb so i have the fr preload set 1 turn softer than
standard and rear preload at softest setting.
am i approaching this correctly or if not, what direction (hard or
soft) should i adjust on comp and reb? perhaps my suspension may
be bad but with only <2K miles on the bike i would find it hard to
believe so. surely there must be some _magical_ setting for my
weight--i can't think that there is no solution since i know a few
others with F4s who don't have as bouncy a ride as what i'm getting.
TIA!
---------------------------------------------
Tony Oh
to...@naig.com (work-email sent here read
M-F 12 pm-8 pm)
td...@ix.netcom.com (home-email sent here read
evenings after 10 pm and weekends)
Rye
zero compression dampening, but that's just me. By reducing compression
though, you may need to increase preload.
Start rebound dampening on your middle adjustment and go from there. If you
find your front end is bouncing (pogo) a lot increase rebound dampening. If
you find your suspension does not return fully between bumps (compacting)
reduce rebound dampening.
It really depends on the roads you want to be set up for, but generally for a
smooth ride... zero compression.
>Subject: suspension setup help
>From: td...@ix.netcom.com (Tony)
>Date: Wed, 25 August 1999 11:23 PM EDT
>Message-id: <37c5b065...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
Rye
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause
and reflect -- Mark Twain
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>zero compression dampening, but that's just me. By reducing compression
>though, you may need to increase preload.
>
>Start rebound dampening on your middle adjustment and go from there. If you
>find your front end is bouncing (pogo) a lot increase rebound dampening. If
>you find your suspension does not return fully between bumps (compacting)
>reduce rebound dampening.
>
>It really depends on the roads you want to be set up for, but generally for a
>smooth ride... zero compression.
>
>
This particular type of damping is very important to keeping your tire
in contact with the road. Bumps or other irregularities basically
attempt to throw your tire up away from the road surface. Compression
damping is intended to allow your front tire to move upward (to follow
the bump), but not allow the tire to move so fast or far that it loses
contact with the ground.
A bike with no compression damping is much more likely to lose grip in
a turn, as even a small bump may bump the tire off the road surface.
Very bad. This setup also increases the likelihood of the front forks
packing up in the bumpy stuff, as they'll move farther up than they
should on each bump, yet normal rebound damping won't allow them to
recover so far. Zero compression damping trades ass comfort for safety
and proper handling. At best, this sounds like a recipe for a mushy
ride with no road feel whatsoever.
I'd recommend instead that the original poster do the following:
Set your sag properly. I bet there's info on the web somewhere on how
to do it, or a book or something. I'm just not in the mood to explain
it here. I'll have my hands full with damping.
If you're unable to set your sag properly, chances are it's because
you're so light that your bike is actually over-sprung. Not a common
problem in the world of stock bikes, but you're well under the weight
these bikes are usually designed for (which is around 150 lbs). To fix
this, you need lighter (or softer) springs, probably both front and
back.
I'd be willing to bet that your problem is that you've got way too
much preload somewhere, and/or your springs are too stiff. If you get
the spring rate right, it'll be much easier to set up your damping.
You should only set up your damping after you've gotten your
sag/preload set as well as you can (if you can't afford new springs,
you'll have to just get as close as you can).
To set your damping (this is only very rough, but should be OK for
general use)--start in the front.
Start with both compression and rebound set either in the middle of
their ranges, or if you know them, on the stock settings.
What you want is a setup so that when you compress the front end hard
(brakes on) and release it, the front end should come up, then down
about 3/4 of that distance, then back up the tiniest tiniest amount,
then stop. If you can't stand over the bike without any weight on it,
you'll have to stand in front of it to do this, since you don't want
your weight to effect the springs. It'll take a few tries to get it
right, but eventually you'll get close. This is usually a bit stiff
for the street, so you might then want to ease off on both a bit, but
don't go nuts.
Once you've got that right, look to the back end. Stand next to the
bike (you might want someone to hold it up), put both your hands on
the fuel filler cap of the bike (or someplace near the center of the
bike, front to back--the filler cap's usually a good bet), then push
down quickly and firmly. What you want is for the whole bike to go
down and rise as a unit. The front and back should go down at the same
rate and the same distance, and rebound at the same rate and distance.
If the front seems to go down first or faster, lighten up on the rear
compression damping a little. If the front comes back up faster than
the rear, lighten up on the rebound in the back. And vice-versa, of
course. Don't mess with the front now--you've got that right--you're
only after fixing the rear.
These simple steps should get you in the ballpark. From there you
should be able to figure out what you like from riding and careful
experimentation.
Some things to remember:
Often, if the back feels weird to you, something's not set right in
the front. The opposite is true too. This isn't always the case, but
it's true often enough that you should at least consider the
possibility. For instance, if the back feels funny, but you feel you
have sound reasons for your settings in the front, then go ahead and
adjust the rear, but consider that it might be the front if you just
changed something about it, even if it feels like the back end.
The adjustment rates on your adjusters will differ. If your full range
of front rebound adjustment is three turns, and the rear rebound range
is 15 turns, you have to remember that turning the front adjuster 1/4
turn will have a hell of a lot more impact than 1/4 turn in the back.
Know the full ranges of your adjusters, and try to keep your
adjustments proportional to the ranges. If you don't, it's really easy
to confuse yourself, 'cause the adjustments you make won't have the
effect you expected.
On the bike you've chosen to ride, you shouldn't have a super-plush
ride--that's for cruisers or tourers. You want to feel the road under
your wheels a little. You don't want it so stiff that you get a
horrible jolt from every little bump, but you don't want that
Cadillac-style "Bumps? What bumps?" thing either. You should be able
to detect relatively small changes in the texture of the road surface,
without rattling your teeth when you run across grooved pavement.
Ride a bike that you know is set up well (for someone else your
weight), and see if you can get the feel of it. Try to get your bike
to feel that way. If you can, get a racer to set it up for you. Next
season, if you make it to any WERA or CCS events at Summit Point WV,
look for #298--I'll help you if you want. Just make sure you've got
your spring rates as good as you can before you show up.
How's that?
BikeBoy
'95 YZF 600
'98 GSXR 600
WERA/CCS #298
Greater DC, USA
RLJ3RD
td...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> what would be the correct setup as far as setting the compression
> and rebound on an F4 as far as obtaining a fairly smooth ride is
> concerned?
Try this web page, You plug in bike, your weight riding style ect. and
it will give you something to start with.
http://www.race-tech.com
--
RLJ3RD ... 98' YZF-R1
"The only thing worse than regret is not trying"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Travis
he is trying to kill you. Either way I would not listen to him if I were
you.
Travis
Rye <fidd...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19990826122557...@ng-fi1.aol.com...
> Start with no compression dampening and go from there. Personally I
prefer
> zero compression dampening, but that's just me. By reducing compression
> though, you may need to increase preload.
>
> Start rebound dampening on your middle adjustment and go from there. If
you
> find your front end is bouncing (pogo) a lot increase rebound dampening.
If
> you find your suspension does not return fully between bumps (compacting)
> reduce rebound dampening.
>
> It really depends on the roads you want to be set up for, but generally
for a
> smooth ride... zero compression.
>
>
> >Subject: suspension setup help
> >From: td...@ix.netcom.com (Tony)
> >Date: Wed, 25 August 1999 11:23 PM EDT
> >Message-id: <37c5b065...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
> >
> >what would be the correct setup as far as setting the compression
> >and rebound on an F4 as far as obtaining a fairly smooth ride is
Rye
say so".
That would make riding any pre-85 or so bike suicide according to your
"experience" and there could not possibly be anyone with more than 14 years
riding experience still living.
Try again Travis, but next time cross-check your thoughts with reality!
>Subject: Re: suspension setup help
>From: "Travis" ei...@cts.com
>Date: Thu, 26 August 1999 06:28 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7q4f5d$gm3$1...@nusku.cts.com>
Travis
[you]
> say so".
Look Asshole, you are the one who said 0 compression damping. That is flat
out dangerous and you are a fucking idiot for advising anyone to start with
that setup.
Since I am not an expert on suspension setup and I don't want to be a
DANGEROUS ASSHOLE LIKE YOURSELF I would suggest the original poster get and
read A Twist of the Wrist II, it has a good section on suspension setup. Or
better yet I would enrole in Freddie Spencers Superbike School, at his 3 day
camp they go into bike setup extensivly. Oh ya, that is what I did . . .
> That would make riding any pre-85 or so bike suicide according to your
> "experience" and there could not possibly be anyone with more than 14
years
> riding experience still living.
What does this have to do with anything. I guess your just an idiot who
figures that if a bike does not have a compression damping adjustment that
there is 0 compression damping. What is your point, try again Rye??? So
where do you get your experience from, riding a pre-85 machine for the past
14 years . . .
> Try again Travis, but next time cross-check your thoughts with reality!
Cross check your thought with reality, that's rich. At least I am not
telling anyone dangerous information. You are the one who should check with
reality. You are totally confused about setup and to boot you are an
arrogant ass who is telling people wrong info and then you want to attack
me.
FUCK YOU RYE
To everyone else sorry about my language, is this guy an idiot or what.
Wal
know what he's talking about. Whatever next?
Just one point; when talking about 'range of adjustment' it's worth
mentioning that this is the range in which the adjusters actually do
something! The first thing you should do before altering any compression
or rebound settings is find the 'Working Range' of the adjusters. With a
lot of the stock forks and shocks fitted to bikes these days a lot of
the adjuster postions may not actually affect the damping much, if at
all. This varies considerably from bike to bike. On some forks i've
worked with the adjuster working range only amounted to about a third of
the positions available, and these were at one end of the adjuster
range, not in the middle.
So, find the working range of the adjusters and then set them the the
middle adjustment of the working range and go from there.
Wal.
Tony
wrote:
>A bike with no compression damping is much more likely to lose grip in
>a turn, as even a small bump may bump the tire off the road surface.
>Very bad. This setup also increases the likelihood of the front forks
>packing up in the bumpy stuff, as they'll move farther up than they
>should on each bump, yet normal rebound damping won't allow them to
>recover so far. Zero compression damping trades ass comfort for safety
>and proper handling. At best, this sounds like a recipe for a mushy
>ride with no road feel whatsoever.
>
i noticed this when i experimented by setting the front comp to soft--
the front tended to feel loose, almost as if it wanted to wander side
to side on its own. not a good feeling...
>If you're unable to set your sag properly, chances are it's because
>you're so light that your bike is actually over-sprung. Not a common
>problem in the world of stock bikes, but you're well under the weight
>these bikes are usually designed for (which is around 150 lbs). To fix
>this, you need lighter (or softer) springs, probably both front and
>back.
>
Yep, i'm lightweight (127lb). i have the rear preload at its lowest
setting (1 of 7); 2 is default, from what i hear, it's set for a
typical 140lb or so rider with smooth road conditions. i currently
have the front preload slightly softer than stock.
>I'd be willing to bet that your problem is that you've got way too
>much preload somewhere, and/or your springs are too stiff. If you get
>the spring rate right, it'll be much easier to set up your damping.
>You should only set up your damping after you've gotten your
>sag/preload set as well as you can (if you can't afford new springs,
>you'll have to just get as close as you can).
>
Like i stated above, i know it can't be rear preload since it's at its
softest (lowest) setting. given that i don't have enough body mass,
i guess that it could be the rear spring but i'm not too thrilled at
having to go to a softer one. in any case, it's not so much the
rear that bothers me but the front.
>To set your damping (this is only very rough, but should be OK for
>general use)--start in the front.
>
Again, if i can get the front not to feel loose (i.e., track without
wander from side to side a bit), along with reducing the pogo
effect somewhat, i can live with a slightly rough ride. guess that's
the price i have to pay for being lightweight.
>Start with both compression and rebound set either in the middle of
>their ranges, or if you know them, on the stock settings.
>
I have both front and rear rebound at stock, front and rear comp
slightly stiffer than stock. still get front end pogo somewhat loose
tracking (not really extreme but just enough so that i know it's
there).
>Often, if the back feels weird to you, something's not set right in
>the front. The opposite is true too. This isn't always the case, but
>it's true often enough that you should at least consider the
>possibility. For instance, if the back feels funny, but you feel you
>have sound reasons for your settings in the front, then go ahead and
>adjust the rear, but consider that it might be the front if you just
>changed something about it, even if it feels like the back end.
>
in my case, it's the front that feels loose. i can live with the back
bouncing on rough pavement if it's just because i don't have enough
body mass. as long as the front tracks almost like it's on rails i
can live with a little bounce up front, but i would like to know
whether to stiffen or soften front comp/reb in trying to reduce front
end pogo.
>On the bike you've chosen to ride, you shouldn't have a super-plush
>ride--that's for cruisers or tourers. You want to feel the road under
>your wheels a little. You don't want it so stiff that you get a
>horrible jolt from every little bump, but you don't want that
>Cadillac-style "Bumps? What bumps?" thing either. You should be able
>to detect relatively small changes in the texture of the road surface,
>without rattling your teeth when you run across grooved pavement.
>
I don't want it stiff either but it is somewhat disturbing to see my
headlight beam bounce up and down and also notice that other
sport bikes don't appear (from my vantage point on my bike) do
seem to exhibit the nagging problem i'm getting on my F4.
>Ride a bike that you know is set up well (for someone else your
>weight), and see if you can get the feel of it. Try to get your bike
>to feel that way. If you can, get a racer to set it up for you. Next
>season, if you make it to any WERA or CCS events at Summit Point WV,
>look for #298--I'll help you if you want. Just make sure you've got
>your spring rates as good as you can before you show up.
>
dunno if i can make it out to WV seeing how i'm over here in CA but
thanks for the offer...
>How's that?
>
Thanks for your input! it gets frustrating at times cause i'm
trying to figure out which way to go as far as soft or hard on
comp and rebound so that i can get a smooth but stable
ride...
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>in my case, it's the front that feels loose. i can live with the back
>bouncing on rough pavement if it's just because i don't have enough
>body mass. as long as the front tracks almost like it's on rails i
>can live with a little bounce up front, but i would like to know
>whether to stiffen or soften front comp/reb in trying to reduce front
>end pogo.
>
If your front is pogo-ing, chances are you want more rebound damping.
It's possible that your compression damping is so soft that your
current correct rebound setting can't take care of the extreme travel,
but this is unlikely. Dial in a bit more rebound damping.
>>On the bike you've chosen to ride, you shouldn't have a super-plush
>>ride--that's for cruisers or tourers. You want to feel the road under
>>your wheels a little. You don't want it so stiff that you get a
>>horrible jolt from every little bump, but you don't want that
>>Cadillac-style "Bumps? What bumps?" thing either. You should be able
>>to detect relatively small changes in the texture of the road surface,
>>without rattling your teeth when you run across grooved pavement.
>>
>I don't want it stiff either but it is somewhat disturbing to see my
>headlight beam bounce up and down and also notice that other
>sport bikes don't appear (from my vantage point on my bike) do
>seem to exhibit the nagging problem i'm getting on my F4.
Fixing the rebound (and thus the pogo problem) will probably take care
of this. You might also look at your headlight housing and make sure
it's properly secured--maybe it's loose and bouncing around, and not
the bike.
>
>>Ride a bike that you know is set up well (for someone else your
>>weight), and see if you can get the feel of it. Try to get your bike
>>to feel that way. If you can, get a racer to set it up for you. Next
>>season, if you make it to any WERA or CCS events at Summit Point WV,
>>look for #298--I'll help you if you want. Just make sure you've got
>>your spring rates as good as you can before you show up.
>>
>dunno if i can make it out to WV seeing how i'm over here in CA but
>thanks for the offer...
>
>>How's that?
>>
>Thanks for your input! it gets frustrating at times cause i'm
>trying to figure out which way to go as far as soft or hard on
>comp and rebound so that i can get a smooth but stable
>ride...
>---------------------------------------------
>Tony Oh
>to...@naig.com (work-email sent here read
> M-F 12 pm-8 pm)
>td...@ix.netcom.com (home-email sent here read
> evenings after 10 pm and weekends)
You mention (in places I snipped) your preload settings a lot, but
don't mention if they're guesswork or actual attempts to set your sag
correctly. I can't stress enough that you should at least try to set
your sag properly, with measuring and everything. If you can't get it
totally right, and you can't spring for new springs, then at least
you'll be as close as you can get. This will do a lot for the quality
of the ride, and greatly enhance the work your adjusters do.
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>damping when there is not even an adjustment setting that allows it? 0 clicks
>from softest guys!
>
>Thanks for sticking to the point though!
>
I hadn't even considered that you were talking about absolute zero
compression. That's so impossible that it never even crossed my mind.
I happen to think that zero CLICKS is probably a bad idea too.
The way I figure it, the most extreme settings available on a shock or
fork are there for after you change spring rates or such. With the
stock springs, you should find yourself working best in the middle of
the working range (thanks to someone for pointing this out) of the
adjusters.
If you're using an extreme setting on an otherwise unmodified
suspension part, chances are you've got something wrong, be it spring
rate, oil viscosity, whatever. It might not be your fault--maybe
you're heavier than average, like me, or lighter. Changing spring
rates and oil viscosity to suit the rider or surface usually has the
effect of bringing your damping settings back to a more
middle-of-the-road status.
I had some pretty extreme settings on the YZF until I made spring
changes (still need stiffer in the back, actually), and would have had
the same problem on the Gixxer too, but I knew in advance that I was
too heavy for the stock springs. Now I'm running more or less in the
middle of the damping ranges, and the bike is working great.
So anyway, I'd still argue that setting your damping, on any adjuster,
to 0 clicks is probably a mistake. Same goes for cranking it all the
way up.
Charles Busa
Work on the springs, dampers only control how long it takes to get to
maximum travel, not how far maximumtravel will be. Then re adjust the
dampers for your preferences.
Good Luck
Charlie Busa
Tony wrote:
> what would be the correct setup as far as setting the compression
> and rebound on an F4 as far as obtaining a fairly smooth ride is
> concerned? the reason i'm asking is that my bike rides a bit
> rough (i can see the headlight beam bounce up and down--think
> riding over railroad ties but not as extreme). I've softened the
> front compression 1 turn from standard and the rear comp softer by 1/2
> a turn--i figure that this would give the bike more suspension travel
> and thus soak up the road irregularities a bit but apparently it's not
> enough. i've also stiffened front and rear rebound a bit. also,
> FWIW, i weigh 127 lb so i have the fr preload set 1 turn softer than
> standard and rear preload at softest setting.
>
> am i approaching this correctly or if not, what direction (hard or
> soft) should i adjust on comp and reb? perhaps my suspension may
> be bad but with only <2K miles on the bike i would find it hard to
> believe so. surely there must be some _magical_ setting for my
> weight--i can't think that there is no solution since i know a few
> others with F4s who don't have as bouncy a ride as what i'm getting.
>
> TIA!
>
Rye
heavyweight range as a combo). You may recall from other posts our leanings
towards trailbraking... we don't experience dive problems nor traction problems
nor weight bias change problems nor tracking problems in bumpy corners nor
keeping up with or leaving behind solo rider problems. I suppose if you grab
the front brake hard and sudden you could require aggressive compression
dampening settings, but that was never my style.
Aggressive suspension settings are often an indication of unsmooth riding... or
of course riders of the large human category or extremely bumpy asphalt.
Though, I have never experienced tracks or roads so bumpy as to warrant major
changes from the soft settings. And I even raced at Riverside, for the last
few years of its existence, that they refused to repave since each of its last
3 years was always supposed to be the "last." And I can confidently say that
not many (at the club level) could touch me in its bumpy esses.
I stand by my recommendation... an excessively bumpy ride is caused by too much
compression dampening and I would start at 0 (clicks).
If your theory were middle settings theory were true why would manufacturers
deliver bikes at the softer compression settings?
>Subject: Re: suspension setup help
>From: mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>Date: Fri, 27 August 1999 10:34 AM EDT
>Message-id: <37c69f86...@client.se.news.psi.net>
Rye
>Message-id: <37c6db72...@client.se.news.psi.net>
>
><snip>
>
>>I stand by my recommendation... an excessively bumpy ride is caused by too
>much
>>compression dampening and I would start at 0 (clicks).
>
Agreed, springs and compression dampening work in the same direction. But, as
you state below it's not the issue.
>Now
>on most stock bikes, this is unlikely, as they're typically
>undersprung. Your theory holds in this case. Why not, however, take it
>safety first, and start with way too much damping and back it off a
>little at a time?
In my opinion that is much more dangerous! Your forks will not compress much
(if at all) over bumps and the inertia of your entire bike will be lifted into
the air. I.e. jump! It will take much longer (waiting for gravity to over
come this new path) for you wheels to get back on the ground weighted and when
they do they will weight down extremely hard! It is safer to err on the light
side where only the weight of your wheel and some suspension parts needs to
come down which is down so much quicker and lighter since you have gravity AND
springs working in the right direction.
> My opinion is that starting at 0 clicks is sort of
>like jumping off a high building to see if the fall will break your
>legs. Wouldn't you want to start with a smaller drop, and work your
>way up to the highest you were comfortable with?
>>
>>If your theory were middle settings theory were true why would manufacturers
>>deliver bikes at the softer compression settings?
>>
>First, manufacturers rarely set up a bike all that well. Odds are good
>that they've erred on the side of cushiness.
Agreed there too, cushiness is certainly not for every one. It depends on how
rough a rider is with his control inputs. Do you grab your brakes or do you
squeeze your brakes? Subtle difference, but it is significant. But cushy
doesn't necessarily mean dangerous and that is what Tony (the original poster)
was going for, cushy since most of his riding is freeway. I go cushy because
my control inputs are not rough, but subtle. I don't disrupt my suspension all
that much especially riding double.
>They know that beginners
>are more likely to be chased off by a harsh ride than a mushy one.
>
>I'm definitely not one of those who typically says "it came that way
>from the factory, so that's how it belongs." Just a quick check of the
>idle mixture screws on any bike will tell you why I don't say that.
>They're typically all set different, and usually none of them is set
>to the specs provided by the factory shop manual. So I'm perfectly
>happy to believe that the stock settings are crap in general.
You stated previously that you are a large person. It would be expected that
stock suspension doesn't suit you. But you have to admit that what works for
you doesn't apply to others and what works for the average sized person will
not apply to you. One, caveat riding double, it is still possible to ride
smoothly on light suspension settings and our combined weight is likely higher
than yours and worse distributed.
>
>Second, there's the question of effective range on the
>adjusters--perhaps where the factory sets them is smack in the middle
>of the effective range, and a tiny turn either way will yield a huge
>change. Maybe it's not the softer setting at all, but rather dead
>center in an effective range that's way to the "soft" end of the total
>range of movement for the adjuster.
If you look at how the dampening opens up you will see that it is linear, the
change in area of the opening from each click to the next is the same. There
are no large jumps in area between clicks.
>>
>>Rye
>>
>>Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to
>pause
>>and reflect -- Mark Twain
>
>
>BikeBoy
>'95 YZF 600
>'98 GSXR 600
>WERA/CCS #298
>Greater DC, USA
>
>
>
>
>
>
The bottom line is Tony wanted cushy and that requires very little compression
dampening.
Rye
>Date: Thu, 26 August 1999 10:39 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7q4tqu$12r3$1...@nusku.cts.com>
>
>Why do you think we are all idiots.
Nope, I just think you are an idiot.
>We all knew you meant
Try speaking for yourself and let others do their own talking
>>(I can't believe I'm wasting my time on this dumb fuck Travis-ty.)
>
>Oh, thats whitty . . .
Thanks, I thought so.
>
>> My bikes fork's factory setting is 2 clicks from the softest setting on
>> compression now why would they set it so close to suicidal if it was
>dangerous?
>> And if you really do think I was talking absolute 0 you seemingly realize
>that
>> it is impossible to go to 0 dampening and the factories wouldn't even
>offer
>> such a choice even if it was possible. So how could you even conclude
>that my
>> advise as you twisted around in your twisted mind could endanger the guy
>who
>> asked for advice.
>>
>> Now about pre-85 bikes. The Delivered and hard set compression dampening
>was
>> about what the current softest adjustment setting offers. If you weren't
>so
>> clueless that have been your clue that I was talking clicks relative to
>the
>> softest setting?
>
>I knew all along, but it is fun you what some asshole dry to dig himself out
>of a hole.
Wow that's good Travis-ty of nature, you actually chose the correct version of
"knew". But, could you please get your mommy to translate the rest of that
sentence? I'm sure she still understands your baby talk. Speaking of your
mom, what did such a nice woman ever do to deserve the hardship you burden
(note present tense) her with?
>
>> By the way what happened to your little delusion that I had compression
>and
>> rebound backwards? You didn't explain how you got that conclusion either.
>
>Because if you had the minimum rebound damping settings that is not optimal
>but not dangerous. Minimum compression could be very dangerous in many
>situations. Lose of contact with the road, excessive dive in a panic stop,
>etc...
I spoke too soon, you chose at random wrong this time the correct form is
"loss".
Perhaps you need to smooth out your riding, little boy.
>
>> And yes the bulk of my experience comes from racing pre-85 bikes in 125GP,
>> 250GP, 750 and Open Stock, Modified and SuperStreet (now known as
>superbike)
>> and Formula I some of which had fully adjustable suspension before it was
>> offered on production machines. And what experience do you have to offer?
>
>Look guys, see how many racing classes he knows from watching speedvision.
>Wow, I am impressed.
>
>> And don't quote me what you read or somebody told you. Tell me what you
>> understand.
>
>So you went out all on your own, never read anything no one ever told you
>anything huh. We can all tell you never read anything or listened to anyone
>because your an idiot, but I had no idea that you were so intelegent that
>you never needed anything or anybody for info to learn. You just did it all
>with your own experience, that is impressive.
You pretty much got that right. A lucky guess. I was fortunate enough to get
a lot of help with engines, but not any help with chasis set up. In the 80's
there was nothing to read except Keith Code's Incomplete Works which put a lot
of riders on their butts at Willow.
I'm not saying that Mr. Code didn't know what he was doing, I'm just saying he
didn't know how to teach it and didn't know how to write it. At least not in
1981 when I took his class. His teachings consisted of little more than "Can
you say countersteer" and relax when crashing. I have not been to any of his
recent classes nor have I even read his second book, there are basic aspects he
still does not discuss, according to the last I heard.
And I accept that I am in the minority on that opinion, but it is my opinion
just the same.
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>I stand by my recommendation... an excessively bumpy ride is caused by too much
>compression dampening and I would start at 0 (clicks).
I think you'd find that too stiff springs are also a major cause. Now
on most stock bikes, this is unlikely, as they're typically
undersprung. Your theory holds in this case. Why not, however, take it
safety first, and start with way too much damping and back it off a
little at a time? My opinion is that starting at 0 clicks is sort of
like jumping off a high building to see if the fall will break your
legs. Wouldn't you want to start with a smaller drop, and work your
way up to the highest you were comfortable with?
>
>If your theory were middle settings theory were true why would manufacturers
>deliver bikes at the softer compression settings?
>
First, manufacturers rarely set up a bike all that well. Odds are good
that they've erred on the side of cushiness. They know that beginners
are more likely to be chased off by a harsh ride than a mushy one.
I'm definitely not one of those who typically says "it came that way
from the factory, so that's how it belongs." Just a quick check of the
idle mixture screws on any bike will tell you why I don't say that.
They're typically all set different, and usually none of them is set
to the specs provided by the factory shop manual. So I'm perfectly
happy to believe that the stock settings are crap in general.
Second, there's the question of effective range on the
adjusters--perhaps where the factory sets them is smack in the middle
of the effective range, and a tiny turn either way will yield a huge
change. Maybe it's not the softer setting at all, but rather dead
center in an effective range that's way to the "soft" end of the total
range of movement for the adjuster.
>
>Rye
>
>Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority, it is time to pause
>and reflect -- Mark Twain
Tony
wrote:
>If your front is pogo-ing, chances are you want more rebound damping.
>It's possible that your compression damping is so soft that your
>current correct rebound setting can't take care of the extreme travel,
>but this is unlikely. Dial in a bit more rebound damping.
>
Makes sense--i think that at one point i may have sorta unknowingly
at the time had made such an adjustment, as i noticed afterwards that
the front tracking was a bit more stable. guess i just need to fine
tune it. it's sorta tough to get it close enough cause on the F4,
there aren't any _clicks_--the comp and rebound adjusters turn
freely.
>Fixing the rebound (and thus the pogo problem) will probably take care
>of this. You might also look at your headlight housing and make sure
>it's properly secured--maybe it's loose and bouncing around, and not
>the bike.
It's not the headlight housing, unless the entire front (including the
handlebars) is loose. in any case, i can feel the front bounce and
track a bit loosely.
>You mention (in places I snipped) your preload settings a lot, but
>don't mention if they're guesswork or actual attempts to set your sag
>correctly. I can't stress enough that you should at least try to set
>your sag properly, with measuring and everything. If you can't get it
>totally right, and you can't spring for new springs, then at least
>you'll be as close as you can get. This will do a lot for the quality
>of the ride, and greatly enhance the work your adjusters do.
I had a buddy set the front and rear preload to as close as correct
as possible, along with fiddling with the rebound and comp.
although the bike handled fairly well, i still noticed a bit of front
pogoing so i started fiddling with the front and rear comp and
rebound--this is where things went downhill. from what you say,
i'll have to tinker with the rebound a bit; i have the front comp
set 1/4 turn softer than standard and the rear comp 1/2 turn
softer, while front and rear rebound is at standard setting.
thanks again for your input!
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>>Now
>>on most stock bikes, this is unlikely, as they're typically
>>undersprung. Your theory holds in this case. Why not, however, take it
>>safety first, and start with way too much damping and back it off a
>>little at a time?
>
>(if at all) over bumps and the inertia of your entire bike will be lifted into
>the air. I.e. jump! It will take much longer (waiting for gravity to over
>come this new path) for you wheels to get back on the ground weighted and when
>they do they will weight down extremely hard! It is safer to err on the light
>side where only the weight of your wheel and some suspension parts needs to
>come down which is down so much quicker and lighter since you have gravity AND
>springs working in the right direction.
>
that's safe, then work your way to lighter settings. I didn't
originally envision someone riding for a few days with way too much
damping. I didn't actually picture them riding the bike at all that
way--just doing a little driveway testing until the setup seemed
pretty close (using the procedure I outlined about 100 posts ago).
If somebody's gonna ride on the bike knowing that the suspension is
purposely set up wrong, they probably don't have the brains to get it
right in the final analysis. This should not be construed as alluding
to your personal suspension setup. You don't have it intentionally set
up wrong, I'm sure. It works for you, so it couldn't be THAT wrong.
>>>If your theory were middle settings theory were true why would manufacturers
>>>deliver bikes at the softer compression settings?
>>>
>>First, manufacturers rarely set up a bike all that well. Odds are good
>>that they've erred on the side of cushiness.
>
>Agreed there too, cushiness is certainly not for every one. It depends on how
>rough a rider is with his control inputs. Do you grab your brakes or do you
>squeeze your brakes? Subtle difference, but it is significant. But cushy
>doesn't necessarily mean dangerous and that is what Tony (the original poster)
>was going for, cushy since most of his riding is freeway. I go cushy because
>my control inputs are not rough, but subtle. I don't disrupt my suspension all
>that much especially riding double.
>
I also squeeze my brakes instead of grabbing them. I definitely ride
with the bike, not against it, which is how I view people who handle a
bike roughly. I don't really see how your suspension could be working
properly, though. Still, if it's working for you, it's working. We
can't really argue on this point, I'd say. Not enough information can
be shared over the wires.
>
>You stated previously that you are a large person. It would be expected that
>stock suspension doesn't suit you. But you have to admit that what works for
>you doesn't apply to others and what works for the average sized person will
>not apply to you. One, caveat riding double, it is still possible to ride
>smoothly on light suspension settings and our combined weight is likely higher
>than yours and worse distributed.
>
You would, of course, have a fantastic sprung/unsprung weight ratio.
And I was thinking the original poster, small and light as he is,
might also be an exception to the rules--though in a different
direction, obviously.
>>
>>Second, there's the question of effective range on the
>>adjusters--perhaps where the factory sets them is smack in the middle
>>of the effective range, and a tiny turn either way will yield a huge
>>change. Maybe it's not the softer setting at all, but rather dead
>>center in an effective range that's way to the "soft" end of the total
>>range of movement for the adjuster.
>
>If you look at how the dampening opens up you will see that it is linear, the
>change in area of the opening from each click to the next is the same. There
>are no large jumps in area between clicks.
>
However, due to the limited viscosity of the damping fluid (oil in
this case), after a certain amount of opening, it's so far open that
there is effectively no damping, and a larger opening, given the same
pressure, will not change anything. Once the hole's a certain size,
you're no longer slowing the flow. A bigger hole will also not slow
the flow, but at that point, it's all dependent on volume/pressure.
This is the beginning of high/low speed damping theory, I believe.
Though I'm not sure of it, the viscosity of the damping fluid may also
cause a linear adjuster to produce a non-linear effect. I'm not sure
of this, though. Fluid mechanics don't come all that easy to an
anthropology major.
Anyway, in spite of the linearity of the control, there IS part of the
range where turning the adjuster will yield no noticeable result. This
means that where the adjuster DOES yield results, the amount you need
to turn it is much less than you'd think if you counted on the whole
range of motion having an effect.
Let's say the whole range of motion is three turns. Assuming that the
whole range produced an effect, 1/2 turn is only 1/6 of the total
adjustment.
But if the effective range for the adjuster is only 1.5 turns, then
that same 1/2 turn, taken in the effective range, is 1/3 of the total
effective adjustment. A much larger proportion.
You could do a lot of turning out in the ineffective range and nothing
much would happen. But once you got into the effective range--whoa!
Even a tiny turn makes a ton of difference.
That's the principle I was working from.
mebe...@nospam.acornmedia.com
>>It's possible that your compression damping is so soft that your
>>current correct rebound setting can't take care of the extreme travel,
>>but this is unlikely. Dial in a bit more rebound damping.
>>
>Makes sense--i think that at one point i may have sorta unknowingly
>at the time had made such an adjustment, as i noticed afterwards that
>the front tracking was a bit more stable. guess i just need to fine
>tune it. it's sorta tough to get it close enough cause on the F4,
>there aren't any _clicks_--the comp and rebound adjusters turn
>freely.
>
>
>>Fixing the rebound (and thus the pogo problem) will probably take care
>>of this. You might also look at your headlight housing and make sure
>>it's properly secured--maybe it's loose and bouncing around, and not
>>the bike.
>It's not the headlight housing, unless the entire front (including the
>handlebars) is loose. in any case, i can feel the front bounce and
>track a bit loosely.
>
>
>>You mention (in places I snipped) your preload settings a lot, but
>>don't mention if they're guesswork or actual attempts to set your sag
>>correctly. I can't stress enough that you should at least try to set
>>your sag properly, with measuring and everything. If you can't get it
>>totally right, and you can't spring for new springs, then at least
>>you'll be as close as you can get. This will do a lot for the quality
>>of the ride, and greatly enhance the work your adjusters do.
>I had a buddy set the front and rear preload to as close as correct
>as possible, along with fiddling with the rebound and comp.
>although the bike handled fairly well, i still noticed a bit of front
>pogoing so i started fiddling with the front and rear comp and
>rebound--this is where things went downhill. from what you say,
>i'll have to tinker with the rebound a bit; i have the front comp
>set 1/4 turn softer than standard and the rear comp 1/2 turn
>softer, while front and rear rebound is at standard setting.
>
>thanks again for your input!
>
>---------------------------------------------
>Tony Oh
>to...@naig.com (work-email sent here read
> M-F 12 pm-8 pm)
>td...@ix.netcom.com (home-email sent here read
> evenings after 10 pm and weekends)