Suspension service

I will be having the oil changed in my forks and shock soon. I already have a stiffer 84/250 shock spring and imagine I need to go up on the fork springs too. My 05 650 comes stock with the 4,2 springs so I should probably go with the 4,4. Other than that, from what I have heard, I will request that the air chamber gap be 120mm. Im not sure if I should hava it revalved for my weight and riding ability. Maybe someone who has had a revalve can tell us whether it will be a big positive result with it done. I don't race, but I am intermediate to expert. I have some friends that raced desert trying to convince me too . Because sometimes I leave em, especially in the tights!! :twisted:
Pollo

What's your weight?

200 John, 215 with gear. Rear shock around 8mm preload, 33 static, 105 race sag. Feels good and forks don't feel unbalanced but I want the best affect. Im pretty sure I should go up one on fork springs :roll:
Pollo

pollo said:

200 John, 215 with gear. Rear shock around 8mm preload, 33 static, 105 race sag. Feels good and forks don't feel unbalanced but I want the best affect. Im pretty sure I should go up one on fork springs :roll:
Pollo

Click to expand...

.46 for sure on the fork springs, don't even mess with the .44's. You could probably go to an 8.8 spring out back. The less preload on a no linkage PDS shock the better, because it will be more progressive through the travel. At 215 pounds, you will have a bit of preload if you want to run 105mm sag, but not much.

As far as a revalve, well anything can be made better (or worse). If you have specific issues and know exactly what you want, a good tuner can help.

Ill go without the revalve for now, I had a feeling I might need the 8.8, and if so then the .46. Either that or say lose 10 puonds. How is 205 with gear and the 84/250 and .44? Also , the 120 air gap.is ok?
Pollo

pollo said:

Ill go without the revalve for now, I had a feeling I might need the 8.8, and if so then the .46. Either that or say lose 10 puonds. How is 205 with gear and the 84/250 and .44? Also , the 120 air gap.is ok?
Pollo

Click to expand...

120 oil level is as high as I personally would go. Oil level mostly affects the last 1/3rd of travel, but too much oil and the WP forks tend to start deflecting off high speed hits. I'd go with the .46 springs regardless of what rear spring you settle on. It will still feel balanced enough front to rear.

I've decided to have the .44 springs installed along with fork and shock revalve and set up for desert expert at my weight. I think that will be good for me. I may not ride like an expert all the time, but if I want to I can get right down crazy on my bikes. But after 30 years of riding that started out on a 1977 Yamaha YZ 80 I ride a litle more tame most of the time.
As for clicker adjustments, well I have kept them close to stock from the beginning. Now as a note with the stiffer springs and the revalve , will I need to lean towards a little softer compression on forks? I will probably go stock adjustments at first to feel it out. The rear with a heavier spring felt good with the same adjustment.
Pollo

46s for sure, i weigh 14 stones and i run 48s up front but i also have the later '05+ frame. on the rear i have the heaqviest progressive they do which i think is a 85/111 or something.

having done 2 katooms and mine which admittedly is not a lot i would say 92 rear or even a 94.

some progressive numbers for you:
PDS0-250 6.5 8.3 ______________7.4 average
PDS1-250 7 9 ___________ 8 average
PDS2-250 7.5 9.7 use .44 fork springs _____ 8.6 average
PDS3-250 8 10.3 _______9.15 average
PDS4-250 8.5 11 ________ 9.75 average

PDS5-265 6.6 8.6 ___________ 7.6 average
PDS6-265 7.15 9.05 _______ 8.1 average
PDS7-265 7.6 9.5 use .44 fork springs _____ 8.55 average
PDS8-265 8.1 9.95 _________ 9 average

regards

Taffy

Thanks for the numbers. I'll get this right. I still have a few weeks untill I will drop them off at Precision Concepts here in San Diego.
So, the question I have is this. Some of the riders here are using the .44s at around 190 rider weight. So what would be the aproximate rider weight when you would want to change from the 44s to the 46s?
And Taffy. Does 14 stones = 200lbs? I think I heard you mention your weight before. I guess measurement in stones must be an English term.
Thanks, Pollo

pollo said:

Thanks for the numbers. I'll get this right. I still have a few weeks untill I will drop them off at Precision Concepts here in San Diego.
So, the question I have is this. Some of the riders here are using the .44s at around 190 rider weight. So what would be the aproximate rider weight when you would want to change from the 44s to the 46s?
And Taffy. Does 14 stones = 200lbs? I think I heard you mention your weight before. I guess measurement in stones must be an English term.
Thanks, Pollo

Click to expand...

14 stones = 196lbs.


http://www.metric-conversions.org/cgi-b ... m=11&to=12

I went with .48's in my 650 and they are perfect for me. 215lbs or so w/ gear and it's used for desert riding. Anything less and the bike would dive too much it seemed. I also use Mobile 1 ATF (instead of fork oil) and it made a huge difference in eliminating stiction in the forks, making the action way smoother.

Thanks, Motobando. You know, the more I have focused on this subject, the more im noticeing my front end dive some. Today while trail riding I noticed it some. Anyway, it won't be long now and I'm getting the revalve and stiffer springs. The rear will go from the 84/250 that I put on to a progresive rate spring. The forks probably get somewhere similar to what has been sugested.
pollo

When I reinstall the forks after service I was thinking where to set them in the clamps. They came stock set between the first and second scribes. actually the first scribe shows about a milimeter higher than the clamp. Now I have heard different view here, but setting them higher in the clamp closer to the second scribe would in effect put more weight on the front and may make the bike turn quicker. I like the idea. Setting them lower towards the first scribe would probably increase high speed stability. But would it make it push? I wouldn't think too much , but just wondering where the majority is setting thiers. I like the stock setting, but I like the idea of turning just a little quicker.
Pollo

On my 650 I like the forks pulled up 10-12 mm and the axle pulled right back. Put an extra link in the chain if you can to do this. And get forward when cornering.

Steve

what steering stem offset do you use with that setup steve ?

cheers
Bushie

pollo said:

When I reinstall the forks after service I was thinking where to set them in the clamps. They came stock set between the first and second scribes. actually the first scribe shows about a milimeter higher than the clamp. Now I have heard different view here, but setting them higher in the clamp closer to the second scribe would in effect put more weight on the front and may make the bike turn quicker. I like the idea. Setting them lower towards the first scribe would probably increase high speed stability. But would it make it push? I wouldn't think too much , but just wondering where the majority is setting thiers. I like the stock setting, but I like the idea of turning just a little quicker.
Pollo

Click to expand...

it's in the doc
these frames are as stable as a rock an it doesn't compromise them at all to raise the forks. i had mine through1" (gone back to numbers you'll understand there good buddy 10 - 4!). agree with wteve regards the rear axle as well although it has to be added to seat design, suspension set-up etc.

bushie

EVERYONE had the same steering stem? maybe steve bought some katooms but i didn't hear of it?

regards

Taffy

I use the standard offset after experimenting with the quicker option, I found it wanted to 'tuck', so back to standard. Taffy, the 07/08s have an adjustable offset steering stem. Can't remember the numbers OTTMH.

I also run Frank Pons valving and bypass bleed, 46s in the forks with 95 mm air and 5w oil. Not sure whether you can get away with this much oil in the earlier forks. Rear is a sr 9.7, perhaps a tad stiff even for me, but the axle back puts a bit more leverage on it so its good too. I prefer it to being a bit soft. It works well with no surprises, but still can't get the PDS to work as well as the rear end in my 98 501, however its rear end is the best of any dirt bike I've tried. Perhaps a retro graft would be the next improvement. Also have a 2" jacked up seat, high bars, bar ends up probably 3" from standard overall and lowered rearset pegs. It all helps.

I ride most types of terrain except sand and it just works for me. The only thing I tweak to suit varying terrain is the Scotts damper. Others who ride it can't believe how easy it is to ride, note my recent comments where others rated it between a 07 WR250 and a 07 KLX450 in ease of handling on the day in single track and more open trails. Only throttle control needed extra care....... 63HP

Steve

sev

i can't recall anyone mentioning the FE's got variable offsets? i thought it was just the supermotos that got them?

memory is going!

regards

Taffy

I too tried changing the offset on my 07 FE550 to a steeper angle in search of better turning but same as Steve, kept tucking under & dumping the front wheel so changed it back. I rode Steve's bike at the first oz force ride & it really is a limousine. So soft through the rough stuff.

the angle is the same I think, its just reduced offset which means you increase the trail and get more grip thats a plus but yeah then it tucks worse from the wheel being closer to the engine and the wheel hits the frame, I dropped the back end 30mmm by moving the shock mount up. dunno how its going to go with 50mm extended head.. ?

regards
Bushie