Seat subframe

[Greybeard]

Would the v11 sport subframe be the same for '00 and '03?

[Guest ratchethack]

Would the v11 sport subframe be the same for '00 and '03?

GB, there may be a bracket tab or suchlike different between the 2, but AFAIK they're dimensionally identical.

 

I can't help but notice how persistent you are with your inquiries on lowering seat height. This seems to've become something more'n a burr under your saddle. . . so to speak.

 

I do sympathize, my friend. Coupla thoughts, FWIW.

 

The most viable options have all been discussed. IMHO, cutting up the rear subframe to "re-engineer" it would be a complex and expen$ive undertaking with many attendant risks, not to mention the hard limits as to how far you could actually go -- unknown, although measurable in advance, but likely not as far as you would prefer.

 

IMHO (Part II), your least invasive and most "tolerable" trade-off would be to give up considerable ground clearance, but retain full suspension travel and OE geometry by simply going to a shorter custom shock. EXAMPLE: A 1 cm shorter eye-to-eye shock would lower ride height very close to 2 cm at the rear. The limits as to how far you can go here would be the same as above, as far as potential interference between tire and subframe, but now you introduce the risk to "angle overtravel" at driveshaft U-joints at full suspension compression underway -- unknown and hard to predict. Raising the forks ~2 cm in the triples to match the rear would preserve OE rake and trail. This is just me, but doing this would have me grounding hard parts to the point of putting intolerable limits on riding where I like to ride best. But if you just gotta do something, and if a partial dimension change less than ideal would be acceptable, I reckon it beats the living daylights out of compromising suspension travel and throwing handling way out o' whack by backing off suspension preloads, and thereby giving up correct laden vs. unladen sag ratios in the process of ALSO giving up ground clearance.

 

Again, I still b'lieve that not compromising either seat comfort by re-shaping it by removing padding, and giving up handling AND ground clearance with the tried 'n true, "scootch butt over to plant a foot at stops" technique (as I've seen so many riders do) would beat all other options -- but o' course, I'm not vertically challenged (having raised ride height for greater ground clearance), and that's just me.

[Greybeard]

Thanks for your interest, hack.

 

Fortunately , modifying a subframe is the least of my concerns.

Cutting, machining, welding are all in my skill set.

Redesign of suspension geometry is not, so I'll avoid the lowering route as long as possible.

 

The bike is not unridable as delivered, but I'll not settle for generic dimensions when I can do something about it.

 

My initial question was based on the possibility of a '00 subframe being available and it's my philosophy is to start as near net shape as possible.

Items touted as being "machined from 5000 lb. blocks of aluminum" just shows piss-poor planning and too much money if asked.

Time is an issue as well and I never cut up the only example of anything I have so if I can start with another and do minimal mods I'm ahead.

 

Also, I'm not limiting myself to replicating what exists.

The stock seat is far wider than I need as well so I envision either a cafe style seat or an abbreviated biposto design.

I carry no passengers so the sky's the limit.

 

I've inquired here before in that interest of near-net shape and not reinventing a wheel as most I've seen are, indeed, round, but I've not seen them all so ideas are welcome!

[Dan M]

Maybe get a hold of one of these.

[Guest ratchethack]

. . .not reinventing a wheel as most I've seen are, indeed, round, but I've not seen them all so ideas are welcome!

Well, we DO have several remarkable individuals hereabouts who tend to be typically rather unhappy proponents of. . . um, notions that run counter to the laws of Physics (on this planet). . . not to mention common sense.

 

 

As Hubert has recently observed, ". . .so who knows what comes next?"

 

. . . But you gotta admit their sheer entertainment value is hard to beat.

[Greg Field]

All the Sport variants from the LeMans on, including your '03, used a slightly different rear subframe. Will the earlier subframe fit? Probably, but I thinkf the mounting tabs for the carapace are different. Keep in mind, too, that all the early subframes except that of the Rosso Mandello will be painted red, instead of black

 

Isn't real knowledge more refreshing than what the Square Wheels Riders have to offer?

[Greybeard]

As long as the upper and lower mounting holes are the same I'll jig it up and work from there.

 

Again, not at all constrained by items needing to be mounted to the sub-frame itself.

[andy j]

Thanks for your interest, hack.

 

Fortunately , modifying a subframe is the least of my concerns.

Cutting, machining, welding are all in my skill set.

Redesign of suspension geometry is not, so I'll avoid the lowering route as long as possible.

 

The bike is not unridable as delivered, but I'll not settle for generic dimensions when I can do something about it.

 

My initial question was based on the possibility of a '00 subframe being available and it's my philosophy is to start as near net shape as possible.

Items touted as being "machined from 5000 lb. blocks of aluminum" just shows piss-poor planning and too much money if asked.

Time is an issue as well and I never cut up the only example of anything I have so if I can start with another and do minimal mods I'm ahead.

 

Also, I'm not limiting myself to replicating what exists.

The stock seat is far wider than I need as well so I envision either a cafe style seat or an abbreviated biposto design.

I carry no passengers so the sky's the limit.

 

I've inquired here before in that interest of near-net shape and not reinventing a wheel as most I've seen are, indeed, round, but I've not seen them all so ideas are welcome!

 

If you have the manual you can take the diagram and a metric ruler to a copy shop and do a life size blowup to work from

mine cost about $20 shorter shok travel means stiffer ride good luck andy J

[Skeeve]

shorter shok travel means stiffer ride

 

Only if you insist on running straight-rate springs...

(sorry, couldn't resist! )

 

But yes, all else being equal, shorter travel will require stiffer suspension to prevent bottoming over the same bumps...

[GuzziMoto]

Only if you insist on running straight-rate springs...

(sorry, couldn't resist! )

 

But yes, all else being equal, shorter travel will require stiffer suspension to prevent bottoming over the same bumps...

What if you run air springs. I heard they were the bomb.

 

Seriously, the mounting points to the frame will be the same. I say go for it and let us know how it went. If you can do... then don't worry about those who can't.

[Skeeve]

What if you run air springs. I heard they were the bomb.

 

Seriously, the mounting points to the frame will be the same. I say go for it and let us know how it went. If you can do... then don't worry about those who can't.

 

Unfortunately, air-only springing on motorcycles is an abject failure: to maintain anything approaching proper sag, you've got to pump them up so much that by the time the shock is half-compressed, the effective spring rate is already heading for the stratosphere.

 

Air-only springing works better on cages because they've got the space to hide big air reservoirs so that the full compression of the shock makes the volume run from 1/1 to 1/2 or 1/3, instead of 1/1 to 1/infinity, if you get my meaning.

 

Believe me, I learned all this 1st hand. Still working on making the tools to install the Prog. Susp. spring kit on my GL1200 shocks; anyone seen that circular TUIT hereabouts?

[GuzziMoto]

Unfortunately, air-only springing on motorcycles is an abject failure: to maintain anything approaching proper sag, you've got to pump them up so much that by the time the shock is half-compressed, the effective spring rate is already heading for the stratosphere.

 

Air-only springing works better on cages because they've got the space to hide big air reservoirs so that the full compression of the shock makes the volume run from 1/1 to 1/2 or 1/3, instead of 1/1 to 1/infinity, if you get my meaning.

 

Believe me, I learned all this 1st hand. Still working on making the tools to install the Prog. Susp. spring kit on my GL1200 shocks; anyone seen that circular TUIT hereabouts?

Sorry, I guess I should have put one of those goofy smilely faces or something to indicate that I was not serious about the "air springs". I figured one good poke deserves another.