Thanks for the info on the springs. My shock is still in excellent
shape (from a 93 KLR with 38,000 miles, can you believe it!)so it
sounds like something I should really consider doing.
Now, there is one other thing that I didn't mention before for fear
of seeming vain....I kinda like the idea of my bike just being
taller. I think the KLR would look a lot meaner with the tail end a
bit higher, even with no rider on it (basically higher static ride
height). Would shorter links to make it a bit taller sound like a
doable idea? I mean are there any huge no-no's involved that
somebody knows from experience? What I'm thinking is maybe around an
inch higher ride height.
Just some things I can think of would be that the bikes handling
might change some since the overall wheelbase might be a tad shorter.
I'm not sure how it would affect the progressive nature of the rear
linkage, or if it would change "felt" or "perceived" spring rate.
I'm also not sure if shorter links would cause any undue stresses on
the suspension. Any thoughts?
--- In
DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, bigfatgreenbike
wrote:
>
> > Does anyone make a kit to
> >raise the rear suspension of the KLR, using shorter dogbones?
> >Basically a reverse of the lowering kit that is out for the KLR.
> >If there is no kit, has anyone tried manufacturing shorter ones?
If
> >so, I want details!
They look relatively simple to make, it is
> >just a matter of getting the right length I imagine.
> >
> >Why do this? I'm a heavy guy, got the preload and damping on max,
> >and would basically like to have the back end up a little higher
when
> >I'm on it and all loaded up.
> >
> >I imagine that perhaps this can change the geometry on the
> >suspension, maybe the spring rate as well. Any potential problems
> >that anyone forsees?
> >
> >
> The only reason I know of to make raising links is if you lace up
an 18"
> rear wheel.
>
> If your rear suspension is sagged out with a heavy rider aboard,
you
> have the wrong spring installed. eshocks.com has 9" x 2.25" springs
in a
> lot of weights. If you're around 250 in full riding gear, a
500ln/in
> spring would work. Springs cost $90, installation (if you remove
the
> shock and bring it to a shop) about $40.
>
> Basically, with you and your usual load on the bike, balanced on
the
> wheels, the rear end should be sagging 3" from absolutely topped
out.
> Then, with just the bike balanced on the wheels (no rider
or "luggage"
> but any tools that "live" on the bike on board, you should have
about
> .5" of sag from topped out. I have been told by suspension tuners
that a
> spring that meets both tests is correct.
>
> Most people just buy the denniskirk.com spring tool for $50 and
change
> it out themselves. The stock spring is very hard to get off, and
kind
> of dangerous because it's under a ridiculous amount of preload.
(it's a
> 10" spring fit to a shock that's meant to take a 9" spring).
Ironically
> the much heavier aftermarket springs are a lot easier to fit.
>
> BTW that's rebound damping, not compression damping. If you have it
> cranked to the max it will prevent the shock from returning all the
way
> before you hit the next bump, and will actually increase bottoming.
> --
> Devon
> Brooklyn, NY
>
> A15-Z '01 KLR650
> '81 SR500 cafe racer
>
> "The truth's not too popular these days....."
>
> Arnold Schwarzenneger, in The Running Man
