bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 26, 2004 12:23 AM
Front axle bullshit
The service manual calls out bouncing the front end before tightening the right axle pinch bolts. Folks, with the axle nut tightened, there is no play in the front end. The axle nut does not extend past the inner surface of the left lower and the axle pulls the right lower up against the wheel spacer. What the fuck is pushing on the forks going to line up? The planets? Oprah's butt cleavage?
  
|
wilson1
Expert Class
Posts: 345
|
posted December 26, 2004 03:34 AM
it allows the front wheel to take its proper set belevive me it is an important step if you dont do it it will resualt in bering failure iam a kawasaki trained mechanic
|
Michael Lee
Zone Head
Purchase Ivy
Posts: 729
|
posted December 26, 2004 05:04 PM
 Edited By: Michael Lee on 26 Dec 2004 17:05
quote:
The service manual calls out bouncing the front end before tightening the right axle pinch bolts. Folks, with the axle nut tightened, there is no play in the front end. The axle nut does not extend past the inner surface of the left lower and the axle pulls the right lower up against the wheel spacer. What the fuck is pushing on the forks going to line up? The planets? Oprah's butt cleavage?
Hey, lets keep my wife's butt out of this !!!
Its more like a fat bootie now anyways 
|
12RPilot
Pro
Posts: 1094
|
posted December 26, 2004 07:29 PM
Baby got back!!!
____________
If you aren't an AMA member, you're part of the problem.
NESBA #209
http://www.bikepics.com/members/12rpilot/04zx10r/
 
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 27, 2004 08:55 AM
quote:
it allows the front wheel to take its proper set belevive me it is an important step if you dont do it it will resualt in bering failure iam a kawasaki trained mechanic
Sorry, I gotta throw the BS flag here. That makes no sense. Neither does the manual, so you are excused. The manual states pushing on the front end is to "all on (sic) the right fork leg to seat on the front axle." The diagram provided also suggests the right end of the axle is shouldered to butt (booty?) against the right spacer and allow the right fork lower to float laterally on the axle until the pinch bolts are tightened. If the actual design matched this diagram, it would make sense to bounce the front end. It's not for the wheel bearings. It's to reduce stiction by aligning the forks. Look at another bike (gixxer, R1, etc) if this is not clear.
|
fattkaw
Expert Class
Posts: 277
|
posted December 27, 2004 04:26 PM
I was thinking the same thing about it causing stiction. I don't see how in the hell it could make a bearing fail.
|
top shelf
Novice Class
Posts: 99
|
posted December 27, 2004 09:19 PM
It is an attempt to redce stiction and it basically doesn't work. The forks get pulled together by the shoulders on both sides of the axle and put a lateral load on the sliders and bind them up. I machined the shoulder off the allen receiver side and eliminated stiction almost entirely (ala GSXR's). Just be careful with the torque if you do it because it is very easy to pinch the wheel bearings.
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 27, 2004 11:26 PM
Good idea! How has the axle nut taken to being torqued up against the wheel spacer? Use any antiseize in there to prevent galling? Did you reduce the torque from the generous 81lbs they call out? I think 50-60 would make more sense for that modified assembly.
Did you find the fork leg wanting to splay or did it stay up against the spacer? Did you machine a bit off the spacer to give the fork an opportunity to move inward?
The inner spacer between the bearings prevents them from being pinched. The 81 lbs they call out is directly against the bearing-spacer-bearing assembly, so unless the bearings aren't properly seated it's of no consequence, right?
|
Erich
Expert Class
Posts: 131
|
posted December 27, 2004 11:58 PM
As you would end up with a realtionship similar to the GSXR as topshelf intimated, you will be safe to run the same torque spec they use, which is 72.5 ft-lbs.
The lateral runout of the right slider according to my caliper when I checked on my GSXRs ran from .015" to .030" and correct alignment did make a noticable difference all the way at the bottom of the fork travel.
Bouncing is all well and good, but I also found that if you push and pull the lower you can find its mid point without having to worry about bouncing it. Much handier to when by yourself.
|
swft
Needs a life
Full throttle!
Posts: One MEEEEEELLION
|
posted December 28, 2004 07:28 AM
That's what I usually do.
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 28, 2004 08:23 AM
quote:
...Bouncing is all well and good, but I also found that if you push and pull the lower you can find its mid point without having to worry about bouncing it. Much handier to when by yourself.
WTF? You lost me there.
|
jonwright
Needs a job
Posts: 2416
|
posted December 28, 2004 01:47 PM
I know on the long forks of a dirtbike (my KTM has forks similar in design to the 10R as far as pinch bolts etc) you will notice a difference in fork alignment, stiction, and yes, spinning the wheel.
Haven't had the opportunity to test on a 10R, though, but I know the CONCEPT is accurate. Perhaps not application in this particular case.
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 28, 2004 09:52 PM
Fork and front end alignment has been around for decades. I usually start by loosening the upper triple pinch bolts, the stem nut, the axle pinch bolts, and any bolts that fix the clip-ons to the upper triple. Bounce it a few times and then cinch up the upper stuff, bounce it a few more times and then cinch up the lower stuff. I don't do the upper stuff again unless the bike hits the ground or they need to be loose for maintenance or modification. Unfortunately, someone at Kaw Co. neglected to float one side of the axle in the fork lower, so without some modification like what top shelf did, it's a waste of time.
You guys finding the midpoint of the slop with the forks extended are missing the point entirely. You want the forks lined up when they are compressed. That's where it counts. That's why bouncing is important. It forces the fork leg into the position it wants to be in when the bushings are farthest apart so slop is minimized, the fork will be under the most lateral stress, etc. You might as well grab some Kleenex and lotion and take the service manual into the bathroom for all the good that technique will do you. I'm not saying it can't work, just that it's an inferior technique. Erich, your point about it being easier to do alone makes me wonder if you haven't confused it with your Kleenex and lotion sessions. (That was a joke. Don't go getting all bitchy on me, ok?) On the torque question, the gixxer front end was engineered to take 72.5 lbs. The gixxer axle is twice as thick and using the end of the 10R's axle nut to carry forces it wasn't designed to adds a new dimension to things.
|
CanyonCarver
Expert Class
Posts: 121
|
posted December 29, 2004 05:18 AM
bovine or top shelf --
Just trying to make sure I understand what you're referring to. It sounds as if you're saying to machine the lip off the end of the front axle nut (left side of bike, with big-ass allen drive). This makes sense if it's what you're saying. I've had the same experience as bovine, wondering why the F bouncing the front of this bike would make any difference and how it would align properly when the axle is pinching from both sides.
Hoping I've read you correctly, as I've already ordered another axle nut to be machined. Thanx.
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 29, 2004 07:47 AM
I'd go one step further and get another wheel spacer to be machined a mm or two narower. That way the fork leg is free to move inward as well.
|
CanyonCarver
Expert Class
Posts: 121
|
posted December 29, 2004 07:55 AM
Makes sense. I'll get one of those too. Thanks.
|
bovinespongiformencephalo
Pro
variant Kreutzfeldt-Jakob
Posts: 1060
|
posted December 29, 2004 09:09 AM
Then sell it as a kit on egay for $200. My lawyer will be getting in touch with you to negotiate my royalties and consulting fees.
|
CanyonCarver
Expert Class
Posts: 121
|
posted December 29, 2004 10:11 AM
Bwahahaha!! Not a half-bad idea, actually. Hmmmm.... Do I smell a partnership brewing? Problem is, once I have mine, I tend to lose interest. It's all about me, don't ya know?
|
top shelf
Novice Class
Posts: 99
|
posted January 03, 2005 01:22 PM
Sorry missed the discussion on this thread over the holidays, but yes you are all on the right track with what we discovered. Yes we did throw a little anti-seize in between the spacer and axle nut just in case, but I am also changing tires SO often that galling hasn't been an issue. As for the torque thing, 81ft/lbs seems a bit ridiculous to me as well, and as mentioned by Bovine, I have been setting at 55lbs. You are correct that the torque setting is against the bearing-spacer-bearing assembly, but my experience has been that crushing bearings is a very legitimate possibility. Not with these wheels, but wheels in the past that were overtorqued. We have not seen the leg splay or move yet, but we have had limited track time since the mod to give a definitive answer on that
|
sp500
Expert Class
Posts: 195
|
posted January 05, 2005 11:34 PM
Cant seem to find it but someone had gone to traxtion dynamics to see if they could come up with a solution, for people like me who dont want to screw something up with the front axle.
Any word back if that person is here??
|
Erich
Expert Class
Posts: 131
|
posted January 08, 2005 01:45 AM
Hey bovine, I'm not a sissy so I dont use lotion  Not to mention my wife knows what I'm up to if she sees me scamper off with the jergens in hand.
You got the idea that I was referring to the approximate mid point of the slop. It is technically inferior, but in practice is very similar to what I have found the compressed point to be based on strapping the front end (hey not that's not a bad idea for a wanker, eh!).
The reason I beleive the deflection on these KYB forks is not dramatically different using the lotion boy method is the the outer tube has 2 bushings and both are in contact with the inner tube when the bike is static under its own weight as well as when its compressed. Unless you have severly warn bushings the difference I have measured was less than .004 between methods. The action between them yielded no noticeable stiction differences or artificial compression resistance at the bottom of the stroke.
The second key piece is the amount of flex the triple has, and for the zooks anyway, its not bad with the triples properly set in the manner you stated. I dont know if the Kawi piece is cheesier, but no doubt you can see that when the upper triple is off and the amount the lower distorts to allow the tubes to cant in when the bike is weighted and unweighted.
|
|
|
HOME
NEW TOPIC