ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Bikes > Some Assembly Required
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 06-02-2013, 02:45 PM   #16
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052

Don't worry, the dash is not nearly as high feeling when sitting on the bike as it looks in these photos, plus I am making a mask kind of like a KTM 990 ADV has but it will be bar mounted for now for simplicity and testing
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 03:02 PM   #17
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
For anyone curious on the oil cooler, I cut the factory hard lines and then used my TIG welder to make a small bead around the end to hold the hose and clamp from slipping off the end { I tried to use a flareing tool to just flare the end a bit, but the metric line was just a tic too small to grip in my SAE line clamp.} and then pushed the hose on and used hose clamps. The factory lines had hose clamps on it so I am sure it will be fine now.

It just fits under the tank, it shows some, but it just looks like an MX bike radiator sort of and it is out of the front wheel splash unless turned left, then the fender protects it pretty well. Putting it there keeps its out in the wind for decent cooling. I am planning a screen or perforated aluminum gaurd for rocks eventually, but not needed to get it running.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 03:09 PM   #18
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
BTW,
If anyone like the look of the headlight....HUGE thanks to Sailah. He had that one sitting around as a take off from his Ninja 650 project and sent it to me for shipping only....I owe you a beer there buddy cause I think it looks reallly mean on there.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 06:00 PM   #19
larryboy
Leisurely Liar
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: On a set of 50,000 mile tires.
Oddometer: 13,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post
Here are few new pics of the dash panel, the front headlight, and the ones that have been asked for by Larryboy and others the structural additions. On the structual stuff, I added a this piece of gray duct tape to ID the stock rear frame stays, still in place, and some thin blue tape strips to ID the 3 on each side that I have added so you can see them.

Tell me what you think.


Fabrice did something similar to his bike, it's probably strong enough...enough being the key word, I prefer over built, but it will probably work.

I think that top tube will have a tendency to flex down and could fail about where I painted in the yellow lines...if I was forced to use this design I would add a tube on each side right about there.

larryboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 07:53 PM   #20
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
I have thought about that, but Fabrice only added the 2 more verticle ones. I added the forward ones to the lower mount arms and the long horizontal ones. I will keep a close watch on those tubes, but they are strong and just an extra overkill already. You have to keep this stuff removeable for some service and battery access...They are 0.500" .120 wall DOM tubing...all the rest {the forward low ones and the verticle ones} are made out of .750" 0.188" wall DOM tubing. This stuff is way overkill compared to the factory stuff.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 08:13 PM   #21
larryboy
Leisurely Liar
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: On a set of 50,000 mile tires.
Oddometer: 13,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post
This stuff is way overkill compared to the factory stuff.

It's actually way undersized, the factory forks are just sliders...the suspension loaded the engine with the a-arm and the shock pushed almost straight up on the other mounts. We're basically putting a huge lever well forward of where it used to be.

I'm still scared of Fabrice's bike and was terrified! of it until he added the extra struts. I wouldn't ride that bike personally, but that's a call we all have to make for ourselves.

I don't think this is strong enough and somebody was selling these at one time;

larryboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2013, 08:27 PM   #22
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
Yeah those are engineered by a frame manufacturer and sold by Bert Dursmaa for a mere $2000
Those are actually somewhat of my model I was going for here.

I get what you are saying on the stock GS frame geometry, but the force is STILL upward on the shock mount point. The front steering neck still carries all of the weight and downward force from compression.

The biggest geometry differences for me are lateral forces that are now transfered up to the neck that were on the A-arm before...hence the 2 extra braces. Then the next biggest force change the forward impact, say like running into a wall. That force used to be taken by the A-arm mostly as the fulcrum point and pulling on the rear stays.

That Bert D frame you posted only mounts at the A=arm pivot point, and the front frame mount. I am mounted at both of those points, and the rear subframe mount points behind the A-arm mount and straight back to the rear subframe near the shock mount.

I will watch all of the welds and stays closely, but I am quite sure it is enough, and by that I mean enough for anyone. I worry MUCH more about the swingarm shock mount and the trans case at the swingarm pivots than the front frame section.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 12:14 AM   #23
aposaric
Garden mechanic ;-)
 
aposaric's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Location: Zagreb, Croatia
Oddometer: 270
Looking interesting :-) Do you have a side photo of the whole bike? I am interested in the triangulation you mentioned aswell. Those aluminium welds look really great
aposaric is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 08:22 AM   #24
larryboy
Leisurely Liar
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: On a set of 50,000 mile tires.
Oddometer: 13,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post
I get what you are saying on the stock GS frame geometry, but the force is STILL upward on the shock mount point. The front steering neck still carries all of the weight and downward force from compression.

No, the steering neck never carried any weight before. Try this if you're game...take off all of the struts and loosen the bolt on the big aluminum section you have modified, then lift the front end by holding the bottom of the forks, notice that it rotates over on itself, then grab the aluminum section where the shock used to bolt on and notice where things move and how much. That's what I did when I built my frame. You have to remember that only half the suspension load was going up before, half was going down into the a-arm and into the engine at it's pivot.









Ok, I won't fuss at you anymore...just want you safe since it sounds like you're gonna ride it pretty hard, plus you asked.
larryboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-03-2013, 12:36 PM   #25
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
No worries, It is not fussing. I appreciate the input.

I do disagree on the force transfer.
I did lift on the aluminum head with all of the stays off. It does rotate up and over itself. But it does not with the stays in place.
As far as the weight transfer to the A-arm. I see rearward thrust, like under hard braking or hitting something the force is definately transfered to the A-arm. But on suspension travel upward I see it as all of the force is up into the shock pocket just behind the steering bearing. That is the only place that pushes downward on the front wheel.

I see it as I have 3 more anchor points than that Bert D frame head. The small one on the bottom pushes forward on the steering head which prevents the rolling up over itself already {I would never rely on that low pivot alone though}. Then middle stays that come up from the A-arm pivot and are much farther apart at the base than the OE rear stays, so those add some preventing of the fold back, but more protection of side to side movement {imo limited as that may be}. Then lastly those more horizontal top bars prevent any movement.

I am definately no engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday last night....does that help
But seriously, I am a carpenter, primarily metal stud framing, and that multiple angles design is similar to what we build and hang ALOT of weight off of everyday with soffits and cantilevered store fronts. Fabrices bike was still on the road last time I heard from him and I have more triangles and supports than him. I will add some trussing like yours if I see there is any movement or tweeking at all. I have to start off riding very mildly anyway and only street riding at first since I am still healing.

Any other ideas?
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 05:22 AM   #26
icekube1
Middle aged git
 
icekube1's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2007
Location: Can'tberra, Australia
Oddometer: 1,726
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post

But on suspension travel upward I see it as all of the force is up into the shock pocket just behind the steering bearing. That is the only place that pushes downward on the front wheel.



I think Newton's 3rd might say different.

Or maybe not.

Good luck with your build. It looks interesting.
__________________
Cheers

Mike

Why stand when you can sit down..
Why sit when you can lie down..
icekube1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 07:48 PM   #27
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
Am I missing something in my understanding of Newton's laws?

If you take a BMW shock out of that pocket on the front head the bike drops down. All of the support falls on the shock. The front shock is suppoerted by the steering head casting.

The telelever system I removed that Larryboy says carries weight is nothing more than a hindge. The weight is sitting on the on the top of the shock. Unless I am missing something on that also.

BTW, at least imho, anyone who believes 100% in Newton's 3rd has never personally watched a skydiver hit the deck without an open shoot. I have, there is NO opposite reaction. I realize that there is some reaction, but the stepping off a boat logic does not apply to a body hitting the earth at speed. That was not a fun day.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2013, 08:13 PM   #28
kellymac530 OP
motorcycle addict
 
kellymac530's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2010
Location: so. cal.
Oddometer: 1,052
Larryboy,
I keep re-reading this post:
No, the steering neck never carried any weight before. Try this if you're game...take off all of the struts and loosen the bolt on the big aluminum section you have modified, then lift the front end by holding the bottom of the forks, notice that it rotates over on itself, then grab the aluminum section where the shock used to bolt on and notice where things move and how much. That's what I did when I built my frame. You have to remember that only half the suspension load was going up before, half was going down into the a-arm and into the engine at it's pivot.

And I keep looking at my frame, moving parts up and down, and I am really dumb or I am missing something {maybe because I am dumb}.

I am not argueing with you, I respect you a ton and love your frame you built. Think of this as more of educating me..

On the stock Telelever front end the bike sits weighted on the front wheel, agreed?
The path of support that I see is: bottom of the wheel, front axle, fork tubes, ball joint, jumps back a bit to the bottom of the shock, through the shock spring, to the top shock mount, to the front frame head.

Where does the weight transfer to the A-arm? {other than that 2" or so part between the ball joint and the lower shock mount}

I am wondering if we are just seeing it differently because of the engine being a stress member...oilhead BMWs hang the rear suspension and the front suspension separately and are both stressed off the motor.

You asked me to try an experiment if I was game, I can not do that test anymore cause I am welded up and assembled, but on a stock BMW Telelever if you removed thosen 2 rear stays and dropped the bike down on the wheels, the steering head WOULD then fold back on itself, up until it bound up anyway. The only thing stopping that is those 2 rear stays triangulating the front neck.

Help me see what I am missing.
__________________
it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission
kellymac530 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 12:24 AM   #29
DRjoe
Beastly Adventurer
 
DRjoe's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2007
Location: Sunshine coast qld
Oddometer: 4,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post
.

The telelever system I removed that Larryboy says carries weight is nothing more than a hindge. The weight is sitting on the on the top of the shock. Unless I am missing something on that also.
Well going by that theory then if you disconnected the tellerlever wishbone thingy your bike will not fall down because your shock is taking all the loads.
DRjoe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 09:10 AM   #30
larryboy
Leisurely Liar
 
larryboy's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Location: On a set of 50,000 mile tires.
Oddometer: 13,931
Quote:
Originally Posted by kellymac530 View Post

On the stock Telelever front end the bike sits weighted on the front wheel, agreed?

The path of support that I see is: bottom of the wheel, front axle, fork tubes, ball joint, jumps back a bit to the bottom of the shock, through the shock spring, to the top shock mount, to the front frame head.

Where does the weight transfer to the A-arm? {other than that 2" or so part between the ball joint and the lower shock mount}


Help me see what I am missing.

Agreed.

Let's start at the ball joint, that's where the load goes into the a-arm, the shock picks up a percentage of the load...there is a ratio in there and that's why the a-arm mount is huge, the load is getting multiplied by the shock mounting, a bridge engineer could explain it to us better I'm sure. IMHO, this is how they can get away with the wimpy upper mounting of the shock, I know I said "half" the load is up top, but it might actually be a smaller percentage...maybe 30% or so, think of the lower shock mount as a teeter totter...if you're old enough you'll remember the old teeter totter's that let you change the fulcrum and launch your step-brother to the moon.


That's why I stress out when we hang a set of forks well forward of where the load used to be. I tried to build my frame off of what KTM does on their big bikes...truss frame over a stressed engine with standard forks, I would have done better given more time, but I feel that mine is safe and the rest that I have seen aren't.
larryboy is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

.
Display Modes

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 On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 05:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014