Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Thumpers' started by willys, Nov 19, 2011.
That is pretty cool. I like it.
Enterprising idea! From the description, high-quality materials used in manufacture.
Yet . . . doesn't EACH KLR650s have a doohickey inside? Either stock or aftermarket.
Just messin' with you; anyone hep will understand the meaning of the sticker; best wishes for success of your printing endeavor!
Didn't work for me. I got a "Coupon expired".
This is the Sticker I used. It came with my Doo kit.
Sorry. I'll reset it right now!
The coupon is fixed. Sorry about the confusion!
USE CODE "Doohickey20" through Jan 31 for 20% off!
Click the link below...
Eagle Mike may make an amazing doohickey, and related parts, and have forgotten more than I'll ever learn, but I really don't care for his sticker. I'm not a flames kinda guy.
The flames could be easily trimmed off for a more subtle look.
I should add that it's an older KLR, flames may appear at any moment
Gen 1 Fork Bushings: After 56k by the 2 PO's the upper looked very good, the lower has definitely seen better days.
Tried to blow off the fork seals. I stopped at 60 PSI. They are 13 years old but were not leaking and were holding pressure. They came out with a few whacks of the inner fork tube.
El Churro is still taking me to some fantastic places
1st Gen Fork Bottom Valve and Collar: I think this is the correct positioning of the collar. If someone in the know could please confirm? Thanks!
EDIT: My position is "Below-B" of the motobene set of ways to assemble. I think that is how it came from the factory. That position allows the damper-rod valve to fully seat in the inside cutout at the bottom of the outer fork tube. You can see that from the outside when screwing in the damper-rod bolt.
Gen 1 Forks Seals Redo Using the SKF KIT 38P (Green Seals) - More Info
I have the solution for adapting SKF green seals to a Gen 1 KLR, and it turned out to be easier than I thought it would be, requiring no dust seal modification and the machining of one seal spacer for each fork.
What led me off in that direction was investigating my proposed solution just above in post #38990, to buzz off the overhanging lip of the SKF dust seal and stack it under the retaining wire ring and on top of the pressure seal. That would have required a small spacer to take up the difference in stack height between the OE seals and SKF seals, which in total aren't as tall.
Machining some off an older seal I had difficulty maintaining good runout on the lathe after I started to hit the steel core of the seal which you can just see peeking through the overhang:
So I re thought the situation and came up with a clean solution of simply setting the dust seal on top of the retaining ring in the bore. While not a press fit in the shallow bore, it was not loose, so a coaxial location was assured. Here's the mockup of the seal retained via being wrapped with the thinnest Scotch 77 electrical tape:
That would go nowhere and be protected, under the fork boot. it's also easily inspected and re taped if needed by just pulling the fork boot up.
Now with the dust seal not under the retaining ring a spacer is required to keep the seal from creeping up under internal pressure. I ran some numbers:
I found the better retaining ring was the OE part because it had four hold-down waves instead of the SKF ring's three:
...and based the spacer height to just push slightly on the seal on the OE retaining ring.
The spacer (sketch on the right) will be machined from nylon with these dimensions:
...and slightly tweaked in height if needed.
The seal and everything else will be put in after I reassemble the fork. time to go set up the pressure washer so I can blast the dirty crap out the leg and stanchion rod.
This question repeats. That's because of a design oops... lack of 'poka yoke':
And how bad is it? Four possible locations bad! Which is the right one?
I think the above-retaining-ring options are not correct because the steel washer can get sucked up the damper rod rod retracting from full bottoming, and you lose a bit of travel.
That leaves the 'below' options, and that little counterbore/step in the inside diameter makes position '1: Below option A' the logical choice.
In the 'below' position, the retaining ring stops the washer from sucking up, but it's free to move up and down a little in response to pressures.
I think the purpose of the washer is to somewhat shut off the holes at the base of the bottoming cones during bottoming compression, then to lift up a little to open the holes to allow the stanchion rod to retract a bit faster.
As shown, it has worked for years, no issues.
The photos dates show I was last into these forks Julyof 2009, 10-1/2 years ago. My how flime ties!
BTW, the photo dates the last time I was into these forks: July of 2009, so 10-1/2 years ago. I recon that's long enough on a fork oil change![/QUOTE]
HA! I have stuff in my pantry older than that. And it's edible....or was...
Slow turn in lathe, squeeze Scotchbrite and slide one way, then the other. Voila! Micro cross hatching in the hard chrome to reduce friction. Over time, the hard chrome polishes in the high wear areas. This technique fixes that. Good on shock rods too.
You can see the cross hatching in the following pic showing the seal driver I machined. Didn't really need it but it was fun to make. With a little wet silicone 1 rubber, the oil seal slid home with ease. Once cured it helps fix the seal in place and for sure no OD weeps.
Machining the seal spacers tomorrow so the seal won't be able to slide up at all.
Wow there's not much left of the bearing surface of those lower bushings! Yours are the most-worn lower bushings I've seen.
56k is a lot of KLR miles. I don't know if I'll live long enough to get that far on mine
2008. 34000 miles
Those are pretty worn. Interesting that the thin polymer layer on top of the thin sintered bronze-tin layer is more gone on the side (red) having evidence of larger abrasive particles tracks (red) than the other side (blue):
In my hydraulics class at engineering school they went on and on and on about the critical need for clean hydraulic fluid to extend mechanisms life.
Some of the grey in nasty fork oil is sloughed off bushings surfaces. The rest is metals and other crap that help slough off polymer faster. The crap rides low in the oil due to gravity bias, in the region the lower bushings run. That's one reason the larger lower bushings wear out faster than the smaller upper bushings. The other is dynamic loading differences.
One nice thing about DU bushings is the polymer layer is very thin. If it wears off there's still the bronze-tin plated/sintered layer, which is more durable. The material lost isn't that great, so reasonable running fits are maintained even after lots of apparent visible wear that triggers wise replacement.
Forks in the old days didn't have bushings at all and it was common to see stanchion chrome worn through on the clapped out older bikes. No thin 'sacrificial' layer then, and the seals sucked in comparison to today.
Unfortunately one of the first things that happens on these bikes when you take the forks apart is you don't know there is information to be retained, so you just whack the things apart and the washer goes 'tinga-ling' on the floor! The factory position was lost to me a long time ago.
AMAZING how something so simple can lead to so much analysis! But I think as long as the washer in under the retaining ring, in the 'Below' position, the effects of the two orientations, 'A' or 'B' are ambiguous.
The washer thing is a dynamic valve. I can see that because my washers have left a contact witnesses in the bottom of both fork legs corresponding to contact with the surface narrower surfaces of the two washers (red):
In the 'A' orientration the holes are fully open at full bottoming of the stanchion as shown above (blue) with the washer in the up position. But the natural position under gravity is for the washer to be a millimeter or three down, kissing the bottom of the slider bore adjacent to the deeper counterbore for the bottoming cone.
blaustrom, you may be right on the 'Below B' option on the steel washer. In the 'B' position the washer can rise up more on the stanchion up-stroke and that step in the washer bore, when not used as a retaining ring capture (red) as in orientation 'A', does provide a scotche more hole clearance when the washer is briefly fully up against the retaining ring (blue).
The natural-by-gravity and under-compression 'B' orientation has the washer blocking the holes more (green) when down:
In the 'A' orientation down position, the holes end up about 1/3rd shut off. Then again, flow is then shut off around the outside to the inside by (red):
My forks have worked wonderfully with the 'Below' position and 'A' orientation for years. I can G-out and feel the Moab shock bottom a bit when fully loaded, but I can't feel any hard bottoming of the forks, so 'A' is working. better than 'B'? I haven't a clue!
Reassembly of fork one yesterday imitated the longstanding 'A' decision, for lilbit better or lilbit worse