"Rogered Forks"

[8541Hawk]

Well as someone who has used both a spacer and then ride height adjustment.....
I can say the rear of the bike ends up in the same place with a spacer and then the same amount of ride height adjustment.

I can't see how anything else can be different but maybe I'm missing something.

Though Dan Kyle made the same comment, that it is different when done with ride height adjustment....... just don't know why.

[AMCQ46]

Like I said I am not arguing with anyone on this...

dont worry Mark, I dont see this as an argument, and I hope my answers dont come across like I think I know all the answers! I have a bad habit of being a bit too brief in my typing and forgetting the social pleasantries

[Jamoi]

dont worry Mark, I dont see this as an argument, and I hope my answers dont come across like I think I know all the answers!

+1 man, I'm just inquisitive

[8541Hawk]

dont worry Mark, I dont see this as an argument, and I hope my answers dont come across like I think I know all the answers!

+1 man, I'm just inquisitive

As am I...just want to know what is really going on....

With that I did see mention of the upper pivot point being a possible reason for there being a supposed difference to where length is added.

That is all well and good except the upper mount is not a pivot point.

The upper eye has a solid bushing that doesn't rotate and when bolted to the upper mount becomes fixed position.
This is what keeps the shock moving straight up and down and not twisting or flexing before each time the spring compresses.

[bigtwinthing]

Holy Crap, iam so bloody confused, you guys are far to technical, i am setting my Shock at 347mm as Roger said, i will ride it and let you all know what its like. i have a track day booked for july and hope to have buggered sliders well before that!!! ( more likely to only be the left one!!!)

looking forward to riding it though. Thanks for all your comments though guys.( and confusing the crap out of me)

[callam_nffc]

Sorry to hijack the thread, but could someone send me a picture of a spacer.. With dimension if poss?

Also what size you chose and why, gonna make myself one at work for my standard shock until I can afford a replacement

[VTRDark]

Callam you can get away with using washers. This is what the spacers look like.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/HONDA-6MM-REA ... 25882b60d7

(:-})

[gl_s_r]

Like I said I am not arguing with anyone on this...

dont worry Mark, I dont see this as an argument, and I hope my answers dont come across like I think I know all the answers! I have a bad habit of being a bit too brief in my typing and forgetting the social pleasantries

Thanks Al but I was thinking more along the lines that what I was writing could be taken out of context as I am also quite brief and curt in the way I write. You can't put any emphasis on what you write and it is easy to come across wrong in these types of things...

dont worry Mark, I dont see this as an argument, and I hope my answers dont come across like I think I know all the answers!

+1 man, I'm just inquisitive

As am I...just want to know what is really going on....

With that I did see mention of the upper pivot point being a possible reason for there being a supposed difference to where length is added.

That is all well and good except the upper mount is not a pivot point.

The upper eye has a solid bushing that doesn't rotate and when bolted to the upper mount becomes fixed position.
This is what keeps the shock moving straight up and down and not twisting or flexing before each time the spring compresses.

sorry, you are right and my bad choice of words...

Okay one sentence or so to sum it all up and my thoughts on it.. right or wrong:

Maybe a simpler way of saying what I am thinking is that due to the rising rate ratio ( 2:1), anything you do to the shock to change the stance of the bike is multiplied by a factor of 2. The spacer doesn't add anything to the shock length and it is effectively fooling the bike into the new geometry so therefore is remote to the rising rate ratio and therefore only accountable to a 1:1 ratio.

Like everyone else I am trying hard to get my head around this and have been looking at it a lot lately as I am putting a longer swingarm on a bike, along with a longer dogbone and linkages of different pitches than standard. This will change the leverage ratio and as such the spring rates, rising rates etc, infact even the angle of the shock itself is a factor as I will have to decide if I use the original top mount on the frame or have to fabricate another mount further back to keep similar geometry.. I will have to figure out final shock length should I keep the frame mounting point and the way it behaves through the travel as well and ensure the rising rate is correct still. Had a good go at it manually with numbers and simple CAD models but I have been looking for software to help me do this properly and only found one source for this so far that isn't extortionate (http://www.tonyfoale.com). I like the idea of being able to change the few things I need to and see the results and then try a few others out.. like changing the shock length by 3mm. Been talking to some bods here to see if I can get it done here but resources are all tied up and they will not stop things with it being a new year and so much going on to help me with a my suspension questions.

I know that after reading Gaggenau's thread (http://www.vtr1000.org/phpBB3/viewtopic ... on#p174470) and others that have changed swing arms that there can be a profound effect. Despite that the swing arm is longer (this should theoretically create more leverage and require a stronger spring to compensate) it still sat his bike a lot more in the air and the ride was rock hard.... all of which was created from the linkage and shock parts not having the correct geometry for the new positioned mounting point on the swing arm. Tweety was heavily involved in this conversion and I have asked some questions about the conversion I am currently on. When you look at the top picture the linkage or better still the second page of the superhawk site (http://www.superhawkforum.com/forums/mo ... 466/page2/) You can see it just doesn't look right in it's position compared to a standard bike as a quick comparison. I am sure it was worked around by changing springs and shock length to give a result but it was due to the linkage not really working correctly and therefore the shock wasn't really working correctly and the linkage is looking like it is already a good way into it's travel.

Anyway that is me going off on a tangent about irrelevant things.. so back to the original thread and thoughts on that sentence in bold please