Handling & Suspension 2004-2008

OK, here we go......

The shock is 400mm
triples are 17mm offset
They raised the SA pivot but must have lowered the subframe to compensate because my measurement from my spindle top to the fender "cutout" is 650mm.

Here is what they did with the SA pivot, they had to grind away both the pivot mount on the frame and the swingarm.


My headtube is extended about 15mm.



I will work on the engine plate specs later today.

Let the question commence.

OK, Here is the mounting plate info along with a few pictures.

The distance for the top motor to frame bolts is 48mm
The distance for the bottom motor to frame bolts is 32mm

Here you can see how the chain sits on the slider quite a bit. you can also see that the pegs appear to be in the stock position.


Here you can see that the SA pivot is concentric to the mount, there for the mount is moved on the frame, not just drilled offset.


Here you can compare how the shock is located after the movement of the SA pivot and lowering of the subframe compared to my stock 496.



I think that is about it for now.....

I just compared the motor mounting plates of the two bikes (pictures). The factory bike appears to have the motor up slightly in the front as well. I can't measure my old 496 anymore, it is not at my house.

Looking at this one it looks like they added material to get the peg out more and they may be slightly higher.....

great photos Doug and thanks for sharing. can I suggest the best way to measure those front mounts is to measure the distance from the bottom frame bolt to the top engine bolt? just an idea?

any chance of a look at the shock for eccentric eyes and also a photo of the top mount hole? I would say the bottom one as well but I can't believe they would move the hole in the swing arm?

I'm now forming the opinion that they raised the swingarm mount to make the swing arm tilt as much as possible. that way they could use a top out spring in the shock. this would normally keep the bike very squat at the back. 1" shorter and affect the handling.

but they gained about 9mm with the lifting of the pivot point. and controlled the anti-squat with the front engine plates....very clever. another way would have been to have cut and re-welded the swingarm just to the rear of the bottom shock mount and kinked it down but I guess the idea of welding a works swing arm in the middle is a little too much for any team!

yes Doug, if you can suss what they did if anything to the rear shock eyes and frame shock eyes I'd appreciate it.

regards

Taffy

Yeah, Good idea for measuring the plate. I was thinking of that after I posted it....

I will take a look at the other stuff tonight.

great pics Doug

if you have some more time can you please measure the height of the swingarm pivot off the ground with the bike resting under its own weight and the ground clearence I'd like to compare to some other bikes Ive measured.

Cheers

More info time...

Taffy, The measurement from the bottom motor mount to the top frame mount is 73mm.

I will get the pictures up tomorrow.

Bushie, I can get those tomorrow as well.

It's tomorrow, right???

Here is the top shock mount. No eccentrics anywhere, swingarm is not modified.

mud400 said:

Taffy, The measurement from the bottom motor mount to the top frame mount is 73mm

Click to expand...

we need to measure the two bolts the same Doug. I made it 93mm centre to centre but i need to pull out the infield bolt so they both are a little straighter. so we are measuring them differently.


notice the bottom edge of your bracket runs away from the shock body


notice how mine is dead parallel.

so I make the difference; say 3mm. the factories mount is up 3mm but also the shock mount is no longer near the back of the bike/edge of the bracket but it is infact well inboard of the bracket by another 5mm. thats a lot.

bushie
what is the best way to KNOW how much the subframe has been dropped by and where? I reckon in the middle of the rear loop down to the nearest point on the cases?

if bushie or anyone thinks of better perhaps we can get you to have a look Douggie?

of course if we all measure differently and you have two bikes there then perhaps std to works?

regards

Taffy

I've got it!
Doug your frame has a square spine yes? well the factory have cut the back top 10-15mm off and rewelded the shock mount back on afterwards. If you look at this photo you can see the subframe tubes are barely welded to anything. the actual box has gone that the tubes would be welded to. so instead of the box having a square end to the BOX it has an angled cut that makes the end square to the ground. I lightened and zoomed in on your photo.


look at mine and you can see that I have a squared end to the tube and the whole of the frame rails are welded to the box.


I have a triangle of steel on the sidewall that yours has had removed. look at this one to see what I mean. (sharp point down) yours doesn't.

so this has all been about getting the front of the shock as far forwards as possible for that KTM angle. yet I can't see it in the shock against the frames down tubes. I can only surmise then that this was perhaps to use the longer enduro shock without the top out!

so if the top of the shock went up, the swing arm pivot went up that means the swingarm is at the same angle but up 3mm? all that has changed is that the works bikes have flat engines because the front was raised. I've done that anyway?

what am i missing here?

the only other thing is IF they changed the angle of the swing arm side frame supports as well? so the shock still has the appearance of being the same angle?

Doug
I can't see any change in the angle of the shocks. anything you can do to verify?

regards

Taffy

I will think about this for a little.
I still have to get Bushies measurements.

The biggest problem is everything is going to be relative.... If we can just figure out a constant that is usable. I figure the two motor mount holes in the front spars are constant, but they are tough to measure off of.

I have a relatively tall stand I can put the bikes on, the frame rails should not vary.

My brother is now the proud owner of my 496 (stock frame) and he does not live far from me. If I can figure out a way to measure some points I can then bring my stand over to his house and measure a stock frame the same way.

Time to get the motor plate off for some measurements........

Here are some numbers for Bushie.

Ground to SA pivot = 475
Ground clearance = 363

Do you need my tire specs? They are S12's front and rear.

Do these sound about right. I had a really hard time getting it level and then getting the measurement, I don't have help.

my SA pivot centre is 435mm but I do have the top out spring in.....

this seat rail Doug, don't be such a fuss! just take a tape from inside the rear rail where the seat tab is welded and measure around the shock to the shoulder of the cases on the right. i made it 875mm

regards

Taffy

Taffy said:

I've got it!
Doug your frame has a square spine yes? well the factory have cut the back top 10-15mm off and rewelded the shock mount back on afterwards. If you look at this photo you can see the subframe tubes are barely welded to anything. the actual box has gone that the tubes would be welded to. so instead of the box having a square end to the BOX it has an angled cut that makes the end square to the ground. I lightened and zoomed in on your photo.

look at mine and you can see that I have a squared end to the tube and the whole of the frame rails are welded to the box.

I have a triangle of steel on the sidewall that yours has had removed. look at this one to see what I mean. (sharp point down) yours doesn't.
so this has all been about getting the front of the shock as far forwards as possible for that KTM angle. yet I can't see it in the shock against the frames down tubes. I can only surmise then that this was perhaps to use the longer enduro shock without the top out!

so if the top of the shock went up, the swing arm pivot went up that means the swingarm is at the same angle but up 3mm? all that has changed is that the works bikes have flat engines because the front was raised. I've done that anyway?

what am i missing here?

the only other thing is IF they changed the angle of the swing arm side frame supports as well? so the shock still has the appearance of being the same angle?

Doug
I can't see any change in the angle of the shocks. anything you can do to verify?

regards

Taffy

Click to expand...

full marks for creative writing but your WRONG! well half wrong anyway

whats left of the 2006 frame shock mount area.



my 2008 is the same.

I raised my shock top mount 2 years ago, weed 1 year.

9mm up puts the sides of the mount up against the lateral gusseting of the subframe so you can guess how far they raised theirs

keep up at the Back Taff

Doug thanks for those measuremens, its a bit ambiguous but gives a rough idea, a better way is to put the bike on a stand stringline between the 2 axles and measure from there but thats way too much effort for little purpose.

My take on it Based on REAL WORLD testing on hardpack and sand and loam and rocks and enduro stuff and an MX track is they wanted to raise the swingarm pivot (475mm!) not only to tip the shock over which is only going to improve end of stroke velocity by 2-3% and not worth doing compared to the KTM angle (20% improvement) or a link rear (70% improvement) but also to get a nicer swingarm angle for traction, corner entry and cornering behaviour, I say this beacuse the swingarm angle has a completely differnt effect to the chain pull moment.

the reason they rasied the engine IMHO is to stop the chain destroying the swingarm. if they wanted less anti squat they wouldn't have raised the swingarm pivot as much.

Taffy will disagree of course so we can rest assured all is right with the world :roll: :lol: well at least the site harbours healthy discussion (most of the time)

Taffy,
Here are the measurements for the motor plate with it off the bike....
Bottom motor to top frame = 72mm
Top motor to bottom frame = 91mm

Taffy said:

my SA pivot centre is 435mm but I do have the top out spring in.....

this seat rail Doug, don't be such a fuss! just take a tape from inside the rear rail where the seat tab is welded and measure around the shock to the shoulder of the cases on the right. i made it 875mm

regards

Taffy

Click to expand...

I can't visualize this one...... The frame tab the seat hooks on or the one it screws into?

mud400 said:

Taffy,
Here are the measurements for the motor plate with it off the bike....
Bottom motor to top frame = 72mm
Top motor to bottom frame = 91mm

Click to expand...

this is measuring the plate with it in your hand and what with? a vernier to the nearest edge of the holes or to the middle? we're measuring in an X fashion correct?

Bottom motor to top frame = 55mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 63mm C2C.
Top motor to bottom frame = 88mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 96mm C2C.

mud400 said:

I can't visualize this one...... The frame tab the seat hooks on or the one it screws into?

Click to expand...

well I should have said the seat PAN. the seat pan is screwed down just in front of the rear subframe on a tab. my bike has a little 3mm rubber washer on it. if you get a tape on the inside lower edge of the subframe and down onto the shoulder where the swingarm pin enters the back of the engine you can get a pretty straight line there. the most difficult part is the last 5mm of tape when you've had yer finger nails cut!

Bushie

I don't know what your problem is, winding people up includes a hidden joke with wit and you don't possess either in your last post. so i don't see a wind up just a bit of trouble making. don't degenerate a bloody good thread into one of your pissing contests again.

I make no remark about your opinion at all as I don't want to talk to you AGAIN when you get like this. every time you do I'll stop posting. its that simple. get back on message and i'll continue. it's up to you. stick to the material. put your point of view. stop being obnoxious and downright sick.

i feel you've yet again ruined a bloody good thread. wrecked it -watch the next 6 posts. as i say, i make NO comment on your views, YOUR ATTITUDE is though, OOO. you want banter you can have banter, but to answer your last post is just looking for a bloody good scrap and I won't give you it. I didn't last time, I won't now. but i am telling you what you're doing.

you couldn't get me into a pissing contest before on one of my threads and here you are again. to me, this is the second phucking good thread in two weeks you've turned into a pissing contest, you just ruin them. I hope you're proud of yourself...

and now for about 5 posts we'll have a backwave and we'll be so far off subject nobody will remember what the phuq we were here for! well done!

regards

Taffy

Taffy said:

mud400 said:

Taffy,
Here are the measurements for the motor plate with it off the bike....
Bottom motor to top frame = 72mm
Top motor to bottom frame = 91mm

Click to expand...

this is measuring the plate with it in your hand and what with? a vernier to the nearest edge of the holes or to the middle? we're measuring in an X fashion correct?

Bottom motor to top frame = 55mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 63mm C2C.
Top motor to bottom frame = 88mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 96mm C2C.

Click to expand...

Yes, C2C in an X fashion. Using a digital caliper with centering jaws. Plate in hand.

mud400 said:

Taffy said:

mud400 said:

Taffy,
Here are the measurements for the motor plate with it off the bike....
Bottom motor to top frame = 72mm
Top motor to bottom frame = 91mm

Click to expand...

this is measuring the plate with it in your hand and what with? a vernier to the nearest edge of the holes or to the middle? we're measuring in an X fashion correct?

Bottom motor to top frame = 55mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 63mm C2C.
Top motor to bottom frame = 88mm at nearest edge of an 8mm hole or 96mm C2C.

Click to expand...

Yes, C2C in an X fashion. Using a digital caliper with centering jaws. Plate in hand.

Click to expand...

i make a set of standard plates as follows:
69mm and 90mm so I think that you have virtually a standard set of plates. my 90 your 91; my 69 your 72 is just about the slight changes I'd see in standard stuff. my lifted plates are 96 and 63 which is 6mm different measured diagonally.

so that flat bottom to the engine that i can see on the works bike is because the back end of the engine has been dropped rather than the front raised I think?

thanks again. trust that lower shock mount in the SA is standard? can you remove the plastic bung and look at the allen head in there. it should suit symmetrically central to the countersunk recess it is given. an easy one!

regards

Taffy