docc

My worn front rotors were 0.138" (3.5mm) after 45, 608 miles and the replacements (take-offs from an 1100 Sport) are 0.153" (3.9mm) after 24,373 miles. Jeez, I need brakes again?

Searching didn't do me much good, so I took SH's advice and found this thread in How To: greasing the front uj I'm not sure why the search couldn't find it otherwise. Apparently there is not a topic on this in FAQ.

I looked for the stamping on my old rotors, but didn't find any. The 3.9mm figure is from the shop manual. The full thickness is apparently only 4.1mm!

Try a search in Nuts and Bolts for "Front U-joint." There a couple extensive threads on solutions for the access to the front U-joint. It's a little bugger no matter what.

The wear limit on the rotors is 3.9mm. I'm thinking you've already "pushed it."

About 89% of these problems have been solved with The Full Tune Up, including valve adjustment, TPS setting , and throttle body balance. !0% have been relay upgrades or battery replacement, and 1% would be whatever you'll come back and tell us if that doesn't work.

My literature says, "850 mL" for the gearbox (I like Redline Lightweight , but so many like the "heavy" as well). That's a bit less than a "quart" (like 100 mL). The rear "bevel drive" takes 370 mL in all. You could put it all up with Redline heavy (with its proprietary pink moly VooDoo) or 350 mL gear oil and 20 mL Moly. Both boxes are easy to both over fill and under fill.

These bikes just get better and better the more you love them!

Wow, that was some vintage lager! It reminded me of St. Pauli Girl or perhaps Beck's.

18 lb-ft is sure right for an 8mm fastener (25NM), but 36 ft-lb for an axle? Hmmm, that's just 50 NM . . . The solid front in my shop manual (2000 Sport) calls for 90-100 NM (70 ft-lb or so). I can't imagine an '02 axle would need less. Sure there's that lock nut and pinch bolts and all, but . . . Did you find the location for your thimble-like spacer? Mine's an the left side of the bike. That's the left as you sit on it - the bike's left side. Again, mine's not Scura. Also, it is good to retorque the previous fastener after the subsequent in a pinch collar working up in steps to the max torque. Otherwise the first fastener will end up 'loose' and the collar not as effective.

Agreed, I'll always found the stuff just picked off. And it serves to find all the screws and adjustments to fiddle with.

I'm just proud to be "part of it.":mg: I think I'll have a Czechoslovakian lager for St. Patrick's Day to celebrate.

Chris, How far are you from "Bungendore?" (and OMG, is really a place??)

Beer But try to keep the Little Nipples a secret . . .

Here's one of the more coherent posts on bearing load from Pete Roper: Rear Wheel Woes 22 July 2005 And a thread on the spacer length and bearing failure by Baldini: Hot Rear End 27 July 2003

No question, you've done it the right way. I don't know that anyone has ever checked the difference torquing from the off side. Interesting theory on the water running downhill to the left bearing. But, can water get to the bearings inside the wheel? I don't know. Most every one has alleged that the 'sealed' bearing don't come with much grease in them from the factory. It is true, G2G, about the locking nut and probably wouldn't walk off. I would still be nervous about only using 1/4 the torque. Definitely not something I want on my mind at 150 kph. And I forget now what the opinions were about the short spacers. Mine checked out ok as well, but apparently some were a little short allowing a lateral stress on the bearing.

Aye, RL Heavy: all the "moly"- all the love . . . (clean your vent, watch your fill level)

So, this is some curious inter-metric conversion: a guy (uh, dat's me:nerd:) makes a 1.00 mm error; he (dat's me:o) owes Mick a pint. And raz, too. Really, he (dat's me So, this is rather convoluted/forum conversion math: 1.00 mm x 1 (24/7) forum = 5 pints. Since we ('mericans) can only get good ale in 12 ounce bottles, I'm pretty sure I drank all five pints today just lamenting over the Little Nipple Affair. None-the-less, I am so behind on my bar tab form the South'n Spine Raid that I will buy you a beer at the mere mention of *Little Nipples* any where in the world. From now on. Oh, for goodness sake, be discreet . . .

You and Mick have been very kind about the "Little Nipple Affair.":rolleyes: What a difference a silly millimeter can make! I looked in my Owner's Manual, as well, which calls for 12 Kgm for the rear axle. This conversion makes that 86.8 lb-ft (118 NM). My **stars**, I could be haunted by the Littlle Nipple Affair. I think I might owe everyone on the forum a pint. Let me know when you're in the neighborhood . . . BYON (Bring Your Own Nipples)

I would be rather afraid that my rear axle might "walk off" at 30NM. Also, gstallons, some have noted a 'short' spacer in the rear axle leading to perceived early bearing failures. In the end size may (or may not ) matter. You would think it a simple thing: "What torque, the axles?"

I don't think I've ever actually put my torque wrench on the "housing side." But now we know just what kind of nut cases have red-frame silver Sports!

You have my PM. I'm emailing your pint. If I don't make good on this, Luhbo will never forgive me.

According to the Workshop Manual, 30 NM would be the torque for an 8mm fastener (about 22 lb-ft). Some have tried to tighten the rear like the front (90-100), but there have been some opinions that the extra torque (120NM) helps reduce bearing failure. In this case, I'd have to say, "yes, I'm sure about this." But, I for one, appreciate the way the forum works in checks and balances as we discuss and consider postings.

Front: 90-100 NM (66.4-73.8 Lb-Ft) Rear: 120 NM "housing side" (88.5 Lb-Ft)