Fork revalve - Page 2 - Kawasaki Versys Forum
Technical Discussion Topics related to Technical Issues

 1Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 02:58 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
Can you guys recommend a good resource for understanding how cartridge forks work? I'd like to revalve my forks for better damping performance, but I'm a little lost in this discussion. From what I can tell, though, it seems like Kawasaki cut a few corners with the suspension engineering on the Versys. The stock compression stack seems to cripple the cartridge's ability to overcome hydraulic lock, and the non-tapered ends of the shock spring deliver only a crude progressive effect.

I'm a DIYer when it comes to my car, so I'm eager to start tearing things apart and rebuilding them (better, stronger, faster) but I'd like to understand what I'm getting into first. So how did you guys come to know so much about cartridge forks?
UAV online is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #22 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 04:05 PM
Member
 
CJBROWN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: OC, So-Cal
Posts: 1,044
Since the cartridge is in the right leg, what does the oil do in the left one, other than lube the slide bushings?

And why is there a oil level setting in the left one? Just for bottoming?

Chris Brown
In SoCal
2009 V - custom black-on-black - SOLD
CJBROWN is offline  
post #23 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 04:22 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
I was just wondering the same thing... why fill the left fork with oil if there is no piston in there and therefore no damping action?
UAV online is offline  
 
post #24 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 04:52 PM
Member
 
Nytrydr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tracy, California
Posts: 740
Now this is a good thread. Suspension, this is where people should be spending the hard earned dollars instead of aftermarket exhaust that only give you what? 2,3,MAYBE 4 more horse power! You might have more power but you wont be riding any faster. Good suspension set up and almost automatically your riding faster and safer.
Good stuff guy's
Nytrydr is offline  
post #25 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 06:26 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Springville, New York
Posts: 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nytrydr View Post
Now this is a good thread. Suspension, this is where people should be spending the hard earned dollars instead of aftermarket exhaust that only give you what? 2,3,MAYBE 4 more horse power! You might have more power but you wont be riding any faster. Good suspension set up and almost automatically your riding faster and safer.
Good stuff guy's
This is what I did ... and I am very pleased with the result ... It also will help some understand what is going on with their suspension ...


----> Versys Suspension Improvement ... My Way
freewheeler is offline  
post #26 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 06:41 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Belmont, California
Posts: 775
Hey Tomla...How would ya like to redo my forks...I'm not good enough to do what you did and I would loose 1/2 the parts... Will pay if you're interested...I can get the parts you need and throw them in the milk grate for delivery...

If I new what I was doing, I wouldn't still be working
contractor is offline  
post #27 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 08:55 PM
Member
 
Nytrydr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tracy, California
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shatrat View Post
I'm also 192# and I also ride naked.
If the setup works for you I may need to try it as well.

Am I reading this right, is the stock setup just 4x .15x17 shims?

I spent today changing out my generator cover with one from a 650r to get rid of the last of my road rash from last season.
I'm running out of stuff to do. If I don't line out a new project I'll end up bolting on random crap like a KLR owner.
RIDE NAKED!!! isn't there a law against that?
Nytrydr is offline  
post #28 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-18-2010, 10:01 PM
Member
 
Hardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nytrydr View Post
RIDE NAKED!!! isn't there a law against that?
Not in San Francisco
.

~~ Live Like You're Dying ~~


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Hardware is offline  
post #29 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-19-2010, 09:51 AM
Member
 
Nytrydr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tracy, California
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardware View Post
Not in San Francisco
.
now that made my laugh!

Thanks!
Nytrydr is offline  
post #30 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-19-2010, 10:30 PM
Member
 
Hardware's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 1,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nytrydr View Post
now that made my laugh!

Thanks!
Well if that made you laugh these ought to put you on the floor...

This is an actual event in San Francisco. I censored them for the sake of this forum but all they’re wearing is bows, boas and body paint.

It seems that at some point evolution has gone awry!
.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	SanFrancisco_BikeRide-001.jpg
Views:	429
Size:	122.0 KB
ID:	8092   Click image for larger version

Name:	SanFrancisco_BikeRide-002.jpg
Views:	245
Size:	162.3 KB
ID:	8093   Click image for larger version

Name:	SanFrancisco_BikeRide-003.jpg
Views:	264
Size:	135.1 KB
ID:	8094  

~~ Live Like You're Dying ~~


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Hardware is offline  
post #31 of 84 (permalink) Old 08-20-2010, 09:44 AM
Member
 
Nytrydr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tracy, California
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardware View Post
Well if that made you laugh these ought to put you on the floor...

This is an actual event in San Francisco. I censored them for the sake of this forum but all they’re wearing is bows, boas and body paint.

It seems that at some point evolution has gone awry!
.
Thats just wrong!
Nytrydr is offline  
post #32 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-15-2010, 11:30 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
Question for the valve stack experts

Phoneman, I was looking at your stack and a couple things seem off:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phoneman064 View Post
17 x .15 (3) ----------- removed (1) 17mm LS
14 x .1 --- HS
12 x .1 --- HS
9.5 X .2
10 x .1 (2) ------------ added to allow low speed shims further deflection
11.4 X .4 (3)
(1) You wrote "11.4 x .4", but didn't you mean "11 x .4"?

(2) The total length of your stack is 2.25 mm, while the total length of the stock stack (below) is 2 mm. I guess this extra 0.25 mm doesn't matter? You aren't pre-loading the shim stack, are you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomla View Post
Took out the compression stack and here's what's there-
3 ea. .4mm x 11mm -probably spacing washers
.2 x 10mm -probably a clamping shim
4ea. .15 x 17 shim stack
valve body/piston
...

To aid in the discussion, I drew up the stacks. Stock in green, Phoneman's in blue-green:



I guess what I'm confused about is how you were able to get a major change in high-speed compliance with an apparently minor change to the stack. I thought you'd need a fully tapered stack like tomla's to get the shims to deflect easily at high speeds.

Last edited by UAV online; 11-15-2010 at 12:48 PM.
UAV online is offline  
post #33 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-15-2010, 02:24 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAV online View Post
Phoneman, I was looking at your stack and a couple things seem off:

(1) You wrote "11.4 x .4", but didn't you mean "11 x .4"?

(2) The total length of your stack is 2.25 mm, while the total length of the stock stack (below) is 2 mm. I guess this extra 0.25 mm doesn't matter? You aren't pre-loading the shim stack, are you?

To aid in the discussion, I drew up the stacks. Stock in green, Phoneman's in blue-green:

I guess what I'm confused about is how you were able to get a major change in high-speed compliance with an apparently minor change to the stack. I thought you'd need a fully tapered stack like tomla's to get the shims to deflect easily at high speeds.
(1) I meant what I wrote. The ones in my fork were 11.4. Perhaps yours will be different.
(2) Once you take your forks apart you will notice that there is very little room for the shims to deflect. The additional air space created by the small diameter shims (below the clamping shim) allow for more deflection from the lowspeed shims that are closest to the valve ports.

So you think that Tomla's stack is "fully tapered"? Not sure what this means.
You also asked if I was preloading the stack. No. I listed all the shims in my post. In order to "preload the stack" you would need some special digressive shims. I doubt however it would have any noticeable effect due to the extremely small valve ports.
Phoneman064 is offline  
post #34 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-15-2010, 05:57 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
Please forgive my ignorance.. I'm not questioning your judgment, just trying to pry some suspension tuning wisdom out of you guys.

I do understand how the small diameter shims below the clamping shims allow for the low-speed shims to deflect more.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but it seems that tomla retained the first 17 x .15 mm shims and replaced the other three with 16, 15, and 14 mm shims, respectively. So you end up with a gradual taper from 17 mm to 14 mm, then the 10 mm clamping shim. Here, I drew his shim stack, too:



I notice now, too, that tomla's stack isn't identical in length to the stock setup. It must not matter, since the valve is basically floating in there.

I guess what tomla said is true. You guys took different approaches to the revalve, but ended up with similar results. Tomla has a more tapered stack, but you added some space for additional deflection. My concern is mostly with improving compliance over sharp-edged bumps (i.e. high-speed) so I'm thinking that a more tapered stack, or perhaps even adding a crossover shim makes more sense for me.
UAV online is offline  
post #35 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-15-2010, 06:42 PM
Member
 
Pretbek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: West Chester, PA
Posts: 732
Quote:
Originally Posted by UAV online View Post
My concern is mostly with improving compliance over sharp-edged bumps (i.e. high-speed)
+1
If I ever work up the courage to take my forks apart, I will change the shim stack to reach that goal.

Phoneman, you gave all info including oil weight and fill height, so I could follow your setup verbatim.
Do you think your setup is good for me, 220 lbs without gear, to mostly take out the harshness, but otherwise keep the nice 'n tight suspension?
If not, in which direction should I seek my tweaks?
Pretbek is offline  
post #36 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-15-2010, 09:51 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 137
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretbek View Post
Phoneman, you gave all info including oil weight and fill height, so I could follow your setup verbatim.
Do you think your setup is good for me, 220 lbs without gear, to mostly take out the harshness, but otherwise keep the nice 'n tight suspension?
If not, in which direction should I seek my tweaks?
Well, the trick to removing the harshness (square edge jolts, pavement cracks, expansion joints, pot holes, etc..) but keeping it tight is doing alot of testing.

I've only revalved my V once. I had a good idea on where changes needed to be made if I was going to keep the stock components. If I refined the setup again I would make the following adjustment:
I would change one of the .15 x 17's for a .1 x 17 and blend the oil closer to 13wt or maybe just try the 15wt motorex.

My goal would be to get a little more rebound control. It handles the square edge stuff nicely now but over a few rides I found myself adding more rebound with the clicker. By "adding" I mean making the fork rebound slower.

Its hard to compare different brand oil viscosity. The stamped "wt" isn't accurate enough for fine tuning. The oil viscosity makes a huge difference in this fork. You can just run a lighter weight oil and improve the compression performance but you will not have good rebound control. Since the rebound is inside that sealed cartridge I chose to adjust compression valving as needed for oil weight required for proper rebound.

There are lots of different ways to approach things and every rider wants the best ride for them. I like a nice stable bike with good bottoming resistance (not alot of dive), a firm ride and no jolts through the handle bars. Good luck. Oh yea, we weigh about the same so I think you'll like it.
Phoneman064 is offline  
post #37 of 84 (permalink) Old 11-19-2010, 08:07 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
tomla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: oakland
Posts: 575
After riding this setup for awhile, I have no complaints and lots of suspension happiness. the only thing I will probably change is moving up to 10w bel-ray from the 6w mix, to improve rebound adjustment. For a rider under 175, 7w would be fine. For riders over 200#, I'd try Phoneman's setup. I'd urge those of you who haven't done this mod to give it a shot. It's winter, if you find the time you'll be so glad you did.
tomla is offline  
post #38 of 84 (permalink) Old 02-22-2011, 11:04 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
tomla: Glad to hear your setup is still working out for you. I'm hoping to build on your success with my revalve, still in design.

Two questions for you, all:

(1) Where do you buy shims? Only place I could find selling them is Racetech, and they'd only sell 10-packs.

(2) What would you think about a stack like this? (bottom)



17 x 0.1
16 x 0.1
15 x 0.1
14 x 0.2
13 x 0.2
12 x 0.2
10 x 0.4
etc

The suspension guy I've been talking to is advocating 0.1 mm thick shims in lieu of the 0.15's.. and since I need three of 'em to duplicate a 0.15, I came up with this. The other idea I had was to start the stack with a 18 x 0.1 mm instead, but does that make any sense here? Only reason I thought to do that is because the Showa valve itself is 20 mm, but perhaps the ports are already completely covered up by the 17mm shim?
UAV online is offline  
post #39 of 84 (permalink) Old 02-22-2011, 04:42 PM
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 137
You can buy shims one at a time here.
Racing Suspension Products

I think you'll bend those 17,16,15 dia shims with that stack. You've placed (3) .1 shims where the equiv. of (9) once were and they are flexing on .2 instead of .1 shims.

If they don't bend I would suspect that it will be too soft.

17mm covers the ports properly.

good luck.
Phoneman064 is offline  
post #40 of 84 (permalink) Old 02-23-2011, 12:55 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 73
Thanks for the feedback, Phoneman. And thanks especially for the link.. definitely a better source than Racetech for a single project like this.

I actually made a mistake up there. The picture is right, but I described the stack incorrectly. Here's what I meant to write:

17 x 0.1
16 x 0.1
15 x 0.1
14 x 0.15
13 x 0.15
12 x 0.15
10 x 0.2
11 x 0.4
etc

Nevertheless, I suspect you may be right.. 0.1 mm shims would be too soft.

Last edited by UAV online; 02-23-2011 at 12:58 AM.
UAV online is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Kawasaki Versys Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome