Dammit! Thats twice today, well this morning I haverhad my ass kicked! I think, will bet anyway, you will be able to get an XRL down to about 310/320 pounds.
I did Here is the answer from Cannonracecraft "We do not have a rater here so we are unable to suggest rates. There are a couple of different websites that we use to get suggestions. Moto-pro and RaceTech are good ones." The ones mentioned does not have springs in their inventory that is that strong Ok So too stiff is useless maybe I must go 13kg at back spring ad .55 on the front springs I have already done the Racetec Gold valves in front, it is still way to soft ???
With me no such thing as a stupid question, nope its in correctly but I edited the post i must of spun the motor backwards to get that condition did it 2 more times in the correct direction and came up with .105 exhaust and .85 intake so I'm happy.
Aiming for 290 dry but will have to wait and see what the ole porker tips the scales at when I'm done.
Everything I was told was .55 was too light. These guys have heavier springs. http://www.procycle.us/bikepages/xr650l.html The Gold Valves may be the key. Since you already have those, I would email Race Tech. Gotta have something to help with the initial hit you get from the heavier springs. Race Tech also offers a Suspension Bible that everyone raves about and says is a must have.
XR's only has a chart on their web site. You know I gota say, I really like the deep cushie stock suspersion on my XRL. It's the ONLY way to go on a L O N G trail ride on the rought stuff. If I want a performance suspension I jump on my Husky.
Might be a bit off base here but is something to think about. One of the many jobs I have had was a "Vehicle Testing Tech" for ford motor company. While that title encompasses many things there I spent most of my time working with the "Vehicle Dynamics" groups. (they specialize in the tuning of the suspension systems) I learned a TON about damper control, spring check loads and rates, steering inputs, sway bar efforts, ect ect. The one thing I took from all of it it all truly depends on the calibration of the ass behind the wheel. Engineer X would claim the the "vehicle feels soft and unresponsive" Engineer Y would claim (same vehicle mind you with all the exact same components) the vehicle has robust handling characteristics with a sport ride quality...needless to say the asses were not calibrated to the same standard. With that being said person X setup may not please person Y even if there the same weight bike ect ect. The springs basic job is to keep the vehicle "suspended" at the correct height vs static weight, its the dampers job to tell the spring how fast it can move. The best way to set up a bikes suspension (as i understand it) is to get the spring rates that are designated for your loaded weight I.E. rider gear big gas tank ect. Once that's done get the rear sag adjusted properly and make sure the forks are not too far compresses or expanded, set all damper clickers to "0" and take a test ride. Depending on your observations during your ride you will get a idea how the suspension is responding, diving while braking, harsh on initial compression too easy to bottom ect ect. do this for several iterations of your damper adjustments available and make mental and recorded notes during the rides, this right here may be good enough for the old butt dyno, but if it isn't then proceed to plan for a damper re valve. Re valving dampers realy isnt all that difficult just very time consuming to get it "just right". Ive seen way too many people jump all over the "gold valves" spending wads o cash and being disappointed with the out come because race techs calibrated ass is different from theirs. I would say for (speculating so please don't shoot me) most aplications the stock valves them self's are fine, its the shim stackup that truly effects how fast and how much oil flows past the piston ports causing the damping effect A cheep trick to try before a re valve is if the daper is "harsh feeling" (as in too much damping) to try and change the fluid to a lighter weight, same goes for the inverse if the damper feels"squishy or soft" changing to a higher weight oil can change the dampers performance. If changing the fluid type doesn't "fix" the conditions your seeing I highly recommend reading some tech articles on fork/shock valving/shimming before shelling out huge $$$, like i said it really isn't all that hard just a bit of a learning curve to it.
What I want to know about your days at Ford is, are there really as many hot female engineers running around as is shown in the commericals? AND, what happen to the Mercury chick? SEE MORE: http://www.google.com/search?q=mercury+girl+jill+wagner&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=-kvCUJS2MsS7ygGI64GwAg&ved=0CC4QsAQ&biw=1280&bih=878 And my $.02. Sag is a rubbish method to set suspension. Measuring the sag does not yield a repeatable measurement result. measuring the overall length of the spring does. Isn't there a song that goes something like this" goen to buy me a Mecuryand cruse it on down the road" " to Jill Wagners place and get me some" ! Yeah that the ticket!
Depended on the department, I had a extremely attractive power train engineer (female you silly bastages) ask me how a clutch worked one day and unfortunately the Mercury chick went the way of the name plate, scrapped.... For discussions sake i'll bite on the sag comment Setting sag is more or less setting the ride height up for optimum damper movement and control. We performed basically the same procedures on the test vehicles but needed a alignment rack to allow for free suspension movement. First we would unload the vehicle of any added weight (test equipment load boxes ect ect to mimic a show room vehicle) make sure the gas was full and pull the vehicle on the rack. Once the pins were removed from the floating plates we would jounce the vehicle up and down release it and wait for the suspension to settle. The measurement was usually from the outer ball joint or lower bushing to the inner control arm/link joint or bushing, the difference being the ride height. The problem with only measuring spring height is that it does not account for the suspensions "working ratio" as I like to call it, almost everything short of a beam axle with the springs directly in line with the axle tube or Forks on the motorcycles front end will have a suspension ratio. For instance raising the strut perch on a Escape 8mm would yield a 10mm increase in ride height due to the ratio of the control arm, were as putting a 10mm spring shim in a 4wd F350 equals 10mm increase in ride height. Reasons why Sag measurements seem unrepeatable can be to not paying attention to the details like fuel, gear, ect ect. and also not taking in to account the amount of "sticktion" created in the system (linkage, bushings, shock ect ect) by either jouncing the suspension with the rider off or on will create variations, hell holding both of the brakes on will throw the measurement off. The biggest thing is to try and get repeatable measurements before deciding to adjust one way or another. This seems like the best method I have found and might improve your repeatability http://www.triumphnet.com/st/acc/racetech/setup.htm . Just measuring the Spring may seem more repeatable but it is also much less acurate as your not taking into account the suspension ratio (usually more movement at the wheel end vs the shock)
Yes I was on a stock seat. Well mostly. I cut an inch out and added an inch of that foam you can get as a kneeling pad for gardening. I also made it a little wider. Granted I ended up sitting further forward than the part I made wider so go figure. However I would totally get a different seat if I got that bike, but I'd never get that bike.
The forging company I worked for made the FN-10 steering spindle forging. We made, exact number, 1 million of them. I am appaled to hear an ex Ford engineer, WITH Q-1 AND QS9000 training, tout a measurement system that has low repeatability. You must have been cutten SPC classes to hang with Jill. I agree with the sag measurement method you and the hot babes at Ford used on a car or truck. But on a bike the spring length is best. Regardless of how you do it there is just too much variance between sag measurements to make it a reliable control. In measuring the length of the spring it's easy to get extreamely close measurements to desired. You must of course have some starting range, like Honda gives. And that may be an application for engineers and hot babs at Honda to work out on a test stand. If more pre load is needed for the extra gear taken on a trip shorten the spring and record the length that worked best. After the trip set back to the original length measurement and your done. This measurement can easely be made to 1/64" accuracy. If for no other reason the spring length method is better because it is faster to accomplish. I wager that sag can not be measured to within 1/2" accuracy. And that remindes me, does anybody make a external pre-load adjustment device for a Showa shock?
He said Buns. http://www.google.com/search?q=buns+of+steel&hl=en&tbo=d&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=n2PCUNTZJpP7yAGe-ICwBA&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAA&biw=1280&bih=878
My mind just will not let me understand all of the suspension jargon no matter how much I read or study it. I just know I put in the recommended heavy springs, the compression dampeners are set to full soft, the rebound on the shock is set to full fast because that's the only way the rear tire will stay hooked to the ground through stutter bumps AND IT SUCKS ASS!!!!! I HATE IT!!!!!!
Clam down. Come back from the cliff edge. It's OK. Just try different settings. The heavy springs can be set on the soft side. Keep notes of changes and how they performed and you will get there. Do you think Red Bull wins all the F1 races with just dumb luck? It takes trial, error, evaluation, and re-trial. Do you want Jill to help ya?
