When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I am almost there. Picked up the final spacer from the machinist yesterday. I stood there while he lathed the part to my specs. Good guy, but is retired and has other priorities.
Everything bolted up fine. Bike is now sitting on it's wheels, finally. Took a good long while to sort out the bars, getting them symmetrical that is (Tommaselli). Still have a clearance issue with the clutch master. I'm in the process of converting the stock unit to use a remote res. I think it's going to work out just fine. I'm going to post some photos of what I've done. It will make sense when you see it. Also waiting for (Ebay) a clutch master from a late model ZX14. Really just after the res cup, but at some point in the future I will try out the zx master, but will need a new clutch line as the zx master is radial and the mounting for the line won't work with the stock line. I was going to upgrade the line anyway so no reason not to try the swap. There is another reason to try the new master and that is because of the way I have the bars mounted the stock master, once clamped in place, really needs to rotate a little more so the angle of the lever is more to my liking. Really just an ergonomics thing, but I have spent this much time and energy, might as well make it perfect.
While looking on ebay for an alternative clutch master, I noticed that the casting where the res mounts on the stock unit and a master from '07-08 GSX-R and an '08 ish ZX14, (strange that the parts diagram on Partzilla does not show either of those bikes as having a remote master) which have a remote res, looks the same. Got to thinking that I could remove the stock res and mount it remotely (It happens to be almost the same as the stock brake master, the difference is the clutch master has a tear drop shape to the area where the res sits) That means the the elbow from the brake master will also fit the clutch master once the res is removed. It did and the elbow and the O-ring fit fine. The clutch master lacks the depth and the groove for the snap ring. So I fashioned a bracket to hold the elbow snug against the O-ring using the threaded hole that holds the res in place on the stock master.
After drilling, reaming and tapping for 1/8 NPT the stock res and inserting an elbow and sealing the hole for the original mounting screw, I now have a remote res. I will have to make a new perch as the recycled brake perch isn't quite right.
All of this fooling around will most likely be for not as I have a clutch master with a remote res coming from ebay.
Guess I may not know exactly what stock was since I had heli bars before now. From you pics it looks like the bars are barely above the gull wing lowered triple which is way lower than the 4" rise I have from that spot.
Well finally got most of the last details finished to allow a test ride. Didn't blow up, fall apart, and the engine ran well enough, though no perfect. Put the fairings on and went for a proper ride.The bike feels ~50lbs lighter. Steering is almost too light (due to All ***** bearings?). So easy to change lines in a corner I will have to re-calibrate my effort. The feel is very confidence inspiring. Planted, solid feel to the front. Makes me think that even I could one day drag a knee.
Another plus, has been the increase in braking power. While I had up-graded the calipers (954) the old set-up still had the stock rotors. The control/modulation at the limit is so much improved.
Not sure what part the CBR front wheel plays in the whole new package, but lighter is better when it comes to unsprung weight. The CBR wheel, stripped, no rotor, bearings, tire, using a bath room scale, was 8.1 pounds. Not the most accurate, but close. I have yet to strip the stock wheel, but will to get a comparison.
The HRC throttle tube is just crazy good. Small adjustment in learning the faster response, but the HP increase is just right.
Film a 11
Satisfying to take that first ride right? The quicker steering is due to front ride ht lower relative to rear. Do you have the tubes down as far as they will go in the triples? Are you running a rear spacer or aftermarket shock?
Its a geometry thing. Did you measure the old forks compared to the new ones? That would be a starting point.
Satisfying to take that first ride right? The quicker steering is due to front ride ht lower relative to rear. Do you have the tubes down as far as they will go in the triples? Are you running a rear spacer or aftermarket shock?
Its a geometry thing. Did you measure the old forks compared to the new ones? That would be a starting point.
Yeah, very satisfying. Thought I'd never be done.
Took a measurement before the swap and I am a bit higher now, 6-8mm. I am questioning if I am taking the measurement the same way. I would have expected it to be less.
Using a top triple from a 954. The forks are through about 50mm, which is the height of the clamp on the clip ons. I'm going to set the preload first, then play with the fork height. Had a wise old moto head give me some pointers on what to do.
The shock is a Fox TC and I have it somewhere less than the 11mm max that is recommended as the limit. I'm not at my garage so I can't check my notes on either of those numbers.
Still have the front fender to paint and deal with the positioning of the brake master. Most likely will have to ditch the micro switch for the stop lights and go to a banjo bolt switch. The length of the clip ons need to be shortened, and then back bored to allow bar ends to fit.
Wait, you have usd forks up past the triples? Enuff to put clip ons? That's waay too far up. Stockers can do that but youre gonna have to do something like I did and get riser bars that mount under the triples if you want reasonable geometry. That would explain you on its nose handling which really would be borderline dangerous at that angle.
Wait, you have usd forks up past the triples? Enuff to put clip ons? That's waay too far up. Stockers can do that but youre gonna have to do something like I did and get riser bars that mount under the triples if you want reasonable geometry. That would explain you on its nose handling which really would be borderline dangerous at that angle.
Not so sure about that. Remember the 954 top triple is gull wing. It also does not explain the almost same measurement from floor to the bottom on the frame at the steering head. Both stock forks and the SP1 forks are very close in length. Not currently where I can look at my notes. I think that others can verify that.
The bike does not feel unstable at all. In fact it feels more stable than before the swap.
Hmmm, mine is 19 1/8 both stock and now. That would explain the difference. Pretty sure your number is substantially shorter than stock. I could be wrong as always but for sure my number stock is this one.
I don't think the RC51 mounted the bars above the triples.
Hmmm, mine is 19 1/8 both stock and now. That would explain the difference. Pretty sure your number is substantially shorter than stock. I could be wrong as always but for sure my number stock is this one. I don't think the RC51 mounted the bars above the triples.
Right so if they are flat, that would mean extending them above the triple would mean even less tube extended below the bottom triple. Thus the much shorter forks.
Right so if they are flat, that would mean extending them above the triple would mean even less tube extended below the bottom triple. Thus the much shorter forks.
I get what you are saying. If the forks are at a position where the top is flush with a flat triple, and swap in a gull wing, with out moving the forks, there would now be fork tube above the triple by the amount of the gull wing offset.
What is needed is a measure from a completely stock setup. Say, on the side stand, floor to bottom of the steering head just behind the bottom triple.
Yes but it would be more accurate to have the bike at rest balanced upright which would be static sag. This would be the at rest unaided length of the forks. That is what the 19 1/8" was on my stock forks. That's the number.
Yes but it would be more accurate to have the bike at rest balanced upright which would be static sag. This would be the at rest unaided length of the forks. That is what the 19 1/8" was on my stock forks. That's the number.
Agreed. But I think that if the static positions are the same, how ever it is, the measurement will be comparable. Also I was hoping to make this as easy as possible so to entice someone to take the measurement for me.
Sp1 forks are longer than any of the CBR forks. A bit longer than even the SP2 forks, maybe.
After two tanks of gas, I can say that the new forks are something the bike should of had right from the factory. The front went from smoke signal vague to fiber optic clarity.
A little fine tuning, soften compression a bit, maybe a 1/2 turn more pre-load, drop the rear height a couple of mm and I think I'll be done, for now.
Still have a front brake lever position issue due to the micro switch. Planning to take final measurements for new custom brake lines to rid myself of the dual lines (never like them) and go with a banjo bole switch. Then the micro switch can go into the spares box.
Wish I had a radial master I could use to check for interference. Would rather have a radial, but if I commit to new lines for the current master (954) I'm unsure if the new lines would fit (mounting orientation of banjo) a radial master.
The HRC throttle is certainly a surprise. The access the power curve is astounding. If I had to ride in traffic all the time I think it would get very tiring. As I don't commute, I'll just enjoy the new instant power the engine has.
Was it worth it? It cost a lot, more that my naivety budgeted amount. For me, this is how all my projects go. I should be used to it by now. Short answer, YES.
Received some base line settings for SP forks from a very experienced source. Compression at mid point, rebound 1 1/2 turns out. Much more pleasant to ride on bumpy pavement. I need to find an LEO free road that I can make repeated runs and see if I can get the rebound a bit better
The much stiffer forks have revealed the lack of rigidity in the swing arm. So it's now time to finish the swing arm brace that's been sitting on my bench for a few years.
So xeris at your raving about the handling I decided to lower my front end .75".(raise the tubes in the triples. Its way better now. I feel like the fork oil I changed is too thick and maybe too high a level so will remove some soon.
The lower front seems to put more weight on the front so bumps are absorbed better. May go even lower.
10-24-2017, 06:23 AM
