Changing the rake with Triple Trees?
Hoppy
Fletcher wrote in message <344367...@ix.netcom.com>...
>aaahs, when I noticed that the rake was out about 10 degrees...but it
>was a stock frame...
>
>It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
>know where this genius little item can be found?
>Fletcher
They were selling these things about twenty years ago. I never bought one,
but they were generally considered to be pieces of shit and *very*
dangerous. Like I say, I never personally owned one and they might be
better now, but... Things that seem too good to be true.............
Hoppy Xfx...@worldnet.att.net
(Remove X )
"Live *every* day like it were your last."
Az Barber
Fletcher wrote:
>
> A bro pulled into the actual bar and grille the other evening with a new
> ride...naturally we all went out to give the appropriate oooos and
> aaahs, when I noticed that the rake was out about 10 degrees...but it
> was a stock frame...
>
> It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
> heard of serious problems (like your front end falling off at speed)
> with them?
>
> For a guy like me (so broke I can barely pay attention)...this looked
> like a definate winter possiblity...any help will be appreciated...
>
> Fletcher
You get what you pay for. I remember the last ride I took on a bike
with raked trees. About 90 mph the front end started oscillating back
and forth very violently. After changing my pants, we tried de-raking
the trees and in handled perfectly. Since then I've read a little about
motorcycle frame geometry. When you change the rake of the trees without
changing the angle of the steering head, you get negative trail. A
positive trail condition is what causes the front wheel to follow the
direction the frame is pointed in. (Too much trail can make it difficult
to turn) The easiest analogy (although not a perfect one) is grocery
cart wheels. The caster is radical, causing the wheel to flip around and
trail the axle. If the axle becomes jammed, or even if the wheel
bearings are crapped out, the wheel has a hard time deciding which
direction to go.
Trail can be measured by following the angle of the steering head all
the way to the ground. Mark that point on the ground, then draw a
straight line from the front wheel axle to the ground. The line from the
axle should be slightly behind the mark where the extrapolated steering
head angle hits the ground. 2-4" is typical on touring type bikes. If
the axle is ahead of the steering head angle, you get negative trail.
Wobble time.
bowman
Lee Petersen wrote:
> Fletcher wrote:
> > It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
>
> These have been around forever - used to be sold by Jammers,
> AEE, all the old original chopper parts mail-order places.
there was some precedent for this idea. the old ('55 FLH i'm sure of) cop
bikes came with adjustable rake. it wasn't an extreme change like the
chopper parts, but was to set the bike up for operation with/without the
sidehack. i'm no historian, so i don't know what years had this feature.
Fletcher
A bro pulled into the actual bar and grille the other evening with a new
ride...naturally we all went out to give the appropriate oooos and
aaahs, when I noticed that the rake was out about 10 degrees...but it
was a stock frame...
It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
Lee Petersen
These have been around forever - used to be sold by Jammers,
AEE, all the old original chopper parts mail-order places.
Problem is, they make your bike handle like shit. You're
much better off saving the coin 'til you can do it right.
That's why you don't see many people making them anymore -
they sucked so bad, that guys quit buying them, just like
the cheap fork-tube slugs that some used to extend their
front ends (shudder).
See if the guy will let you ride his bike before you buy
this setup - if you do, I bet you won't buy any.
Lee Petersen
Fletcher
Fletcher wrote:
>
> Thanx...set up a double for the advisors...I'm gonna check out the
> Trolle site...but from the overall reviews...I thinks it may not be the
> project of the winter...every winter requires a project...this just
> doesn't seem like the right one...
>
> Thanx again, appreciate the advice...
>
> Fletcher
>
Shit...I meant Tolle...and no disrespect...please ignore earlier
typo...Fletcher
> Par, Willen wrote:
> >
> > Az says...
> > >
Fletcher
Thanx...set up a double for the advisors...I'm gonna check out the
Trolle site...but from the overall reviews...I thinks it may not be the
project of the winter...every winter requires a project...this just
doesn't seem like the right one...
Thanx again, appreciate the advice...
Fletcher
Par, Willen wrote:
>
> Az says...
> >
> >Fletcher wrote:
> >>
> >> A bro pulled into the actual bar and grille the other evening with a new
> >> ride...naturally we all went out to give the appropriate oooos and
> >> aaahs, when I noticed that the rake was out about 10 degrees...but it
> >> was a stock frame...
> >>
> >> It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
> >> know where this genius little item can be found? And/or has anyone
> >> heard of serious problems (like your front end falling off at speed)
> >> with them?
> >>
> >> For a guy like me (so broke I can barely pay attention)...this looked
> >> like a definate winter possiblity...any help will be appreciated...
> >>
> >> Fletcher
> >
> > You get what you pay for. I remember the last ride I took on a bike
> >with raked trees. About 90 mph the front end started oscillating back
> >and forth very violently. After changing my pants, we tried de-raking
> >the trees and in handled perfectly. Since then I've read a little about
> >motorcycle frame geometry. When you change the rake of the trees without
> >changing the angle of the steering head, you get negative trail. A
> >positive trail condition is what causes the front wheel to follow the
> >direction the frame is pointed in. (Too much trail can make it difficult
> >to turn) The easiest analogy (although not a perfect one) is grocery
> >cart wheels. The caster is radical, causing the wheel to flip around and
> >trail the axle. If the axle becomes jammed, or even if the wheel
> >bearings are crapped out, the wheel has a hard time deciding which
> >direction to go.
> >
> > Trail can be measured by following the angle of the steering head all
> >the way to the ground. Mark that point on the ground, then draw a
> >straight line from the front wheel axle to the ground. The line from the
> >axle should be slightly behind the mark where the extrapolated steering
> >head angle hits the ground. 2-4" is typical on touring type bikes. If
> >the axle is ahead of the steering head angle, you get negative trail.
> >Wobble time.
>
> Right. But... when putting rake into the frame and longleg forks to match, it is
> not a bad thing to be able to fine tune the trail and that is done with the kind
> of setup you're talking about above. Things have come a long way and the highest
> quality rakeable triple trees are available from any dealer carrying the Tolle
> brand of forks and trees. I think he's got a few patents on long leg forks and
> the way he's handled his adjustable trees, and a few of you might have seen his
> products featured on a number of custom bikes in US magazines.
>
> Yes, Tolle is a Swedish engineer heading up a his own engineering company. He
> has his own page at http://www.tolle.se but seems like he was partying as usual
> when he put it together (or it's that Microsoft FrontPage 2.0 acting up again).
> That has to rate the single worst Website in existance, especilaly considering
> he went through the troubl and costs of getting his own domain...
>
> If anyone is really interested I can post more info on where he's at and try to
> find out who in the US carrys his products.
>
> Regards
> PiPPi
> pwi...@swipnet.se
> http://home2.swipnet.se/~w-26659/the_rat
Az Barber
Par, Willen wrote:
<snip question on adjustable triple trees and my opinion of them>
> Right. But... when putting rake into the frame and longleg forks to match, it is
> not a bad thing to be able to fine tune the trail and that is done with the kind
> of setup you're talking about above. Things have come a long way and the highest
> quality rakeable triple trees are available from any dealer carrying the Tolle
> brand of forks and trees. I think he's got a few patents on long leg forks and
> the way he's handled his adjustable trees, and a few of you might have seen his
> products featured on a number of custom bikes in US magazines.
>
> Yes, Tolle is a Swedish engineer heading up a his own engineering company. He
> has his own page at http://www.tolle.se but seems like he was partying as usual
> when he put it together (or it's that Microsoft FrontPage 2.0 acting up again).
> That has to rate the single worst Website in existance, especilaly considering
> he went through the troubl and costs of getting his own domain...
>
> If anyone is really interested I can post more info on where he's at and try to
> find out who in the US carrys his products.
>
> Regards
> PiPPi
> pwi...@swipnet.se
> http://home2.swipnet.se/~w-26659/the_rat
Tolle makes great stuff. I really like the sprocket/brake rotor
combination. I saw a lot of his stuff used on bikes when I lived in
England. Extremely high quality. It seems like it might be catching on
over here too, now that America is back in love with chops.
OK, I should have put a disclaimer to my opinion. "I think they're
crap, but if you know what you're doing they are probably ok, and might
even help". The problem is that I have seen a dozen or so bikes with
adjustable triple trees and none of them were set up correctly.
par_willen
Right. But... when putting rake into the frame and longleg forks to match, it is
Az Barber
K Frome wrote:
>
> Fletcher-
>
> You are getting a lot of misinformation on this issue. Adjustable triple
> trees do not change the rake. The rake is defined by the steering head
> angle and is a function of the frame geometry. What adjustable trees do is
> allow you to change the trail. A stock glide front end has the fork tube
> center line(s) parrallel to the steering head center line. The lines are
> offset with the fork tube center lines in front of the steering head center
> line. This defines a trail value that enables the front end to steer
> responsively at low speeds but remain stable at high speeds. When you
> calculate the frame/front end geometry you have to account for the length
> of the fork tubes and the size of the front tire as well - a point that no
> one seems to be addressing.
Hey, I thought I addressed it. To repeat, I said if you draw an
imaginary line that follows the steering head angle all the way to the
ground with a straightedge, make a mark where the line ends, and compare
it with a vertical line straight down from the front axle you will have
a pretty exact measurement of trail on your bike. The axle should trail
the steering head imaginary line endpoint by 2-4 inches for touring
models. This is per Harley spec. This would take into consideration
wheel size, fork tube length, suspension collapse, curvature of the
earth etc. Actually, even adjusting the rear suspension can make a small
difference too. It isn't relevant to the question, however. Every single
person I have seen with aftermarket adjustable trees is using them to
simulate raking the frame. They don't do the same thing and used in this
way they are dangerous.
> The HD adjustable trees were offered on the side hack equipped bikes and
> may still be for all I know (I don't get by the HD shop much since they
> went Hollywood). The purpose was to increase the trail with the sidehack
> mounted and have the "stock" trail with the sidecar off. The increased
> trail made for a more stable ride with the side hack mounted but sacrificed
> steering response (not an issue with the side hack mounted). These front
> ends also were equipped with an adjustable friction type steering damper.
HD adjustable trees are a completely different animal. They change the
trail only slightly at best. And an FL has quite a bit of trail to begin
with. You can easily end up with negative trail with these aftermarket
trees. You can't do that with Harley trees, they don't adjust that much.
> I ran a set of adjustable HD trees on a 1961 FLH for several years and was
> very pleased with the handling. I was running 4" over fork tubes and a 21"
> front wheel solo (never had a side car). The glide front end is very
> sturdy and rock solid if maintained correctly.
>
> If you patronize HD you could ask about the availability of the adjustable
> glide front end. Remember that you must look at the whole frame/front
> end/wheel and tire package to get a true picture of the actual rake and
> trail.
You can't get them new anymore, if that's what you mean. You
occasionaly see them at swapmeets, but again, unless you're running a
chair, I don't think you'd want to run them.
> Kelly Frome
> 69 ElectraGlide
>
> Fletcher <blk...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in article
> <344367...@ix.netcom.com>...
> > A bro pulled into the actual bar and grille the other evening with a new
> > ride...naturally we all went out to give the appropriate oooos and
> > aaahs, when I noticed that the rake was out about 10 degrees...but it
> > was a stock frame...
> >
> > It was the triple trees!! I had never seen anything like it...anybody
> > know where this genius little item can be found? And/or has anyone
> > heard of serious problems (like your front end falling off at speed)
> > with them?
> >
> > For a guy like me (so broke I can barely pay attention)...this looked
> > like a definate winter possiblity...any help will be appreciated...
> >
> > Fletcher
> >
ftwhd
"K Frome" <kcf...@erols.com> wrote:
>Fletcher-
>You are getting a lot of misinformation on this issue. Adjustable triple
>trees do not change the rake. The rake is defined by the steering head
>angle and is a function of the frame geometry. What adjustable trees do is
>allow you to change the trail. A stock glide front end has the fork tube
>center line(s) parrallel to the steering head center line. The lines are
>offset with the fork tube center lines in front of the steering head center
>line. This defines a trail value that enables the front end to steer
>responsively at low speeds but remain stable at high speeds. When you
>calculate the frame/front end geometry you have to account for the length
>of the fork tubes and the size of the front tire as well - a point that no
>one seems to be addressing.
<snip>
I also had a set of HD adjustable triple trees, i tried to run them
extended and was not happy with the handeling they didnt seem to
responsive and seemed to flop a little, i put them back to NON side
hack configuration and was happy with them, they look so cool! now i
have the regular FLH trees because i went back to more of a stock
apperance with my bike, FLH fenders and a antuique pan headlight
(hydra style) with the head light painted not chromed, looks tits!
anyways if you get the adjustable trees (look at the swaps for them)
id reccomend not extending them even tho i know you will just to see
like i had too..lol
Par Willen
Fletcher wrote:
>
> Thanx...set up a double for the advisors...I'm gonna check out the
> Trolle site...but from the overall reviews...I thinks it may not be the
> project of the winter...every winter requires a project...this just
> doesn't seem like the right one...
>
> Thanx again, appreciate the advice...
Nothin' to it. Er, on the Tolle site. I wasn't kidding on
http.//www.tolle.se being, well, somewhat unusual and mebbe not as
informative as one might hope for.
Regards
PiPPi
par_willen
In article <01bcd8fd$facd1100$5e93accf@fromes>, "K says...
>
>Fletcher-
>
>You are getting a lot of misinformation on this issue. Adjustable triple
>trees do not change the rake. The rake is defined by the steering head
>angle and is a function of the frame geometry. What adjustable trees do is
>allow you to change the trail.
"lot of misinformation"?? I assume you are not refferring Az's post.
PiPPi
pwi...@swipnet.se
par_willen
K Frome
Fletcher-
You are getting a lot of misinformation on this issue. Adjustable triple
trees do not change the rake. The rake is defined by the steering head
angle and is a function of the frame geometry. What adjustable trees do is
allow you to change the trail. A stock glide front end has the fork tube
center line(s) parrallel to the steering head center line. The lines are
offset with the fork tube center lines in front of the steering head center
line. This defines a trail value that enables the front end to steer
responsively at low speeds but remain stable at high speeds. When you
calculate the frame/front end geometry you have to account for the length
of the fork tubes and the size of the front tire as well - a point that no
one seems to be addressing.
The HD adjustable trees were offered on the side hack equipped bikes and
may still be for all I know (I don't get by the HD shop much since they
went Hollywood). The purpose was to increase the trail with the sidehack
mounted and have the "stock" trail with the sidecar off. The increased
trail made for a more stable ride with the side hack mounted but sacrificed
steering response (not an issue with the side hack mounted). These front
ends also were equipped with an adjustable friction type steering damper.
I ran a set of adjustable HD trees on a 1961 FLH for several years and was
very pleased with the handling. I was running 4" over fork tubes and a 21"
front wheel solo (never had a side car). The glide front end is very
sturdy and rock solid if maintained correctly.
If you patronize HD you could ask about the availability of the adjustable
glide front end. Remember that you must look at the whole frame/front
end/wheel and tire package to get a true picture of the actual rake and
trail.
Kelly Frome
Stick
Fletcher wrote:
>
> It was the triple trees!!
This is an annual question and as expected, you'll get the normal number
of negative comments and opinions coming from folks who *never ran a set
of these* puppies.
I ran a set of Kennedy's adjustable (Tolle design) with 4 inch over
tubes for over 20K miles with no damn handling problems *once they were
properly set up*.
Since I wanted longer tubes I also had the frame raked a bit (5
degrees).
The 105 lb. gal that I sold the scooter to certainly has no problem
handling it either. In fact, the biggest problem she has is scraping
the damn pegs as she hauls ass around the twisties.
They allow you to run extended tubes and/or a raked neck with the proper
amount of *trail*.
later
Stick
No.47
Stick
Snarl330 wrote:
> True enough, but the way I read his post was that he was looking for a *cheap*
> fix by just slapping on some adjustable trees.
Cheap? Apparently you haven't priced a set of these things!
Good set of regular trees from CCE runs $400 list.
Adjustables run $750 and UP.
> There have been a lot of
> riders who've gone down due to handling problems related to the installation
> of adjustable rake trees. I found this out the hard way back in the 70's.
>
Really?
In a later post you list being down only 3 times. The only one that you
attribute to equipment failure, you described as:
<> All three times I went down hard, it was in sloooow moootion.
<> The first time my front wheel bearing locked up and spun the axle out
<> of the lock nut and dropped the wheel catty wampus in the front end.
Are ya blaming a siezed front wheel bearing on adjustable trees?
I would bet that the number of adjustable triple tree caused mishaps is
negligible compared to the number of fuckups caused by extended forks
that have no adjustment. Hell, I'd bet that it'd also pale in
comparison to accidents caused or at least contributed to by the current
fad of lowering the machine.
As for setting up the frame with the proper trail to begin with by
selecting the proper rake, tube length, front wheel, rear suspension
height, etc....trying to figure that out gave me a freaking headache for
weeks. The adjust. trees allowed to set the trail perfectly no matter
if riding solo, or loaded down for a cross country vacation.
later
Stick
no.47
Snarl330
Stick <fst...@calweb.com>
On: Wed, Oct 15, 1997 07:12 EDT
True enough, but the way I read his post was that he was looking for a *cheap*
fix by just slapping on some adjustable trees. There have been a lot of
riders who've gone down due to handling problems related to the installation
of adjustable rake trees. I found this out the hard way back in the 70's.
IMHO, if he was going to go to the trouble of having the frame raked, as you
did, then he could also eliminate the *need* for adjustable trees by raking to
the desired degree and extending the tubes. Obviously the proper rake/trail
factor would have to be figured into the equation.
Snarl
1937 EL
1949 FL
1960 Ol' Lady
EKIII Rides with me ...Go Eddie!
Joel Blatt
Re: Changing the rake with Triple Trees?
Do any of the GeezersŞ out there remember the Allied 10-10 kit? This was a
set of trees with a 10Ą rake and a set of (so help me) 10" steel slugs to
extend your forks. I guess I first saw them in Easyriders around the early
70's - don't think anyone would use slugs anymore.
Critter 67FLH
stock trees & Forkin' by Frank!
Joel H. Blatt
Professor of Physics and Space Sciences
Phone: (407) 768-8000 ext 7275
fax: (407) 984-8461
e-mail: bl...@pss.fit.edu
Barry L. Van Hook
In article <Pico-14109...@jstafford.winona.msus.edu> Pi...@Domina.winona.msus.edu (Pico Ashe) writes:
> Adjustable triple trees are old news. The only genuine application
> for them is on side-car machines where you can shorten the rake
> for better handling. In the seventies they were fairly common,
> and almost without exception, 100% CRAP.
Woof, Woof .... Pico's right! At one time tank slappers were much more
prevalent than they are today ... and IMHO that frequency was directly
attributable to those damned adjustable trees, more often than not.
Barry #36
if you think tank slappers ain't no big thing, then you haven't been launched
over the top of one
Barry L. Van Hook (van...@asu.edu)
Management Department, College of Business
Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287-4006
Phone (602) 965-1217 FAX (602) 965-8314
Snarl330
On: Wed, Oct 15, 1997 22:14 EDT
In message-id: <344578...@calweb.com>
Stick <fst...@calweb.com>, writes:
>Snarl330 wrote:
>
>> True enough, but the way I read his post was that he was looking for a
>*cheap*
>> fix by just slapping on some adjustable trees.
>
>Cheap? Apparently you haven't priced a set of these things!
>Good set of regular trees from CCE runs $400 list.
>Adjustables run $750 and UP.
You're right, I haven't priced them (holy shit those boys are spendy!). I
assumed *that* was inferred by Fletcher based on him mentioning something
about not having a lot of cash. But even if he decided to go with the trees
*and* rake the frame as you did/suggested, it would still cost more to do
both. I may be wrong, but I'd guess it would be cheaper to just rake and get
tubes.
>> There have been a lot of
>> riders who've gone down due to handling problems related to the
>installation
>> of adjustable rake trees. I found this out the hard way back in the 70's.
>>
>
>Really?
>In a later post you list being down only 3 times.
*I* found out the hard way while four of us were riding and one, Les Clinger,
went down due to a high speed wobble. *I* was one of the guys who got to help
scrape him off of the pavement. The cause of the handling problem was
determined by a local independant frame specialist. He still has a shop in
Burien, WA and his name is Darwin. And not to split hairs or nothin' but, the
post you are reffering to said went down _hard_. I've had a few other battles
with gravity, but didn't hurt much more than my pride.
<g>
> The only one that you
>attribute to equipment failure, you described as:
>
><> All three times I went down hard, it was in sloooow moootion.
><> The first time my front wheel bearing locked up and spun the axle out
><> of the lock nut and dropped the wheel catty wampus in the front end.
>
>Are ya blaming a siezed front wheel bearing on adjustable trees?
Not at all, that was caused by a *lifetime* greased sealed bearing in a
Hallcraft 21" hub that siezed.
>I would bet that the number of adjustable triple tree caused mishaps is
>negligible compared to the number of fuckups caused by >extended forks that
have no adjustment.
I agree, it's a numbers thang. More people choose the latter than the former
forfront end modifications.
>Hell, I'd bet that it'd also pale in
>comparison to accidents caused or at least contributed to by the current
>fad of lowering the machine.
Ditto, see above.
>As for setting up the frame with the proper trail to begin with by
>selecting the proper rake, tube length, front wheel, rear suspension
>height, etc....trying to figure that out gave me a freaking headache for
>weeks.
The geometry involved to make this shit right doesn't appeal to me either. If
anyone around here asks me about this stuff, I send 'em to Darwin's shop.
> The adjust. trees allowed to set the trail perfectly no matter
>if riding solo, or loaded down for a cross country vacation.
>
>later
>Stick
>no.47
You made a good point, all adjustable rake triple trees are *not* dangerous.
And I am not here to say that they are. My take is purely that this (raking
and buying adjustable trees) is cost prohibitive to the gent who asked for the
input. But then again, I have been wrong before.
Bartender, set Stick up (don't say that in a bank) with a beverage of choice.
Fletcher
>
> You're right, I haven't priced them (holy shit those boys are spendy!). I
> assumed *that* was inferred by Fletcher based on him mentioning something
> about not having a lot of cash. But even if he decided to go with the trees
> *and* rake the frame as you did/suggested, it would still cost more to do
> both. I may be wrong, but I'd guess it would be cheaper to just rake and get
> tubes.
Yep...I was tryin' to cheap out...but after readin' this...I have come
to the conclusion that it's cheaper to do it right (gonna cut the frame,
or get a new one) than an uninsured (as in health) brush with gravity...
at least one that could potentially be avoided...
I appreciate the time and trouble you've taken on this (comes up every
now and again I hear...) learned a bit too...never knew about
trail...can rebuild a motor hungover, but I'm still learnin' about the
rest of it...
Yep...get 'um all a round...put one back on ice for 'um...
Fletcher
Spokejr
Here's my 2 bits. If your looking for the S.F. look (long, low), Increase the
head angle and get longer tubes (slugs=suicide). As the trail increases, you
can start to reduce the trail with the Tolle offset clamps (note, O.E. wide
glide point the tubes back under the stem, sidecar push the axle foward). This
is what will get you in trouble; on XL's & FX's, the trail is minimal at best.
On the Sporty I'm working on (I'm looking for canyon racing perf.) I've
reduced the offset top & rear 5mm (pulling the axle back under the
stem=increasing trail). May try increasing offset on top triple clamp only to
get more trail yet. Reason is that I've put in a set of offset bearings that
reduce (in my case) the head angle 2deg. I.E., reduced head angle-lost trail,
pushed axle back under stem-increased trail. Clear as mud, right. This was
gained by working for Buchanan's Frame Shop, raking, stretching, & even
restoring HD frames.
nirvan...@gmail.com
They're set neutral at the moment and came off an award winning bike featured in heavy metal magazine a few years ago now, the bike was called
Elvira and after the show my mate stripped it and the trips were stored till he heard I was building a softail and said they're mine. I've since decided
to go with a springer front so they are available for anyone that wants em. Nice billet aluminum jobies and have worked just fine.
Cheers folks,
Mike - 0406726057
Jack Bruce@bass.gov
Nirvanabrick wrote in message
news:a6b6489f-ae21-4c70...@googlegroups.com...
Well, that was all cosmic... I assume.
But just what the fuck did any of that mean, and who cares?
Nobody SANE want's your "down under" crap.
nirvan...@gmail.com
Wanker!
nirvan...@gmail.com
Terry Coombs
> Oh ands the parts are made in NZ not Aust you ignorant Canadian
> doomsday prepping freak.
guess they can keep it .
--
Snag