yoke woes

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Sat Sep 06, 2003 9:41 pm

Just been assembling the CBR in leu of a year-end track day - only to find I've got more lock turning right that I do left! Not by much, but definitely noticable. Forks are frame are straight, so must be the yokes?

Since I've replace most of the front end after cadwell, it now appears the 2nd hand yokes are out - though technically they're supposed to be only a few miles old and perfectly straight! Refund pending of course - I need spot-on front-end geometry for a purely track bike for obvious reasons.

Question is though - can they be bent back if it only appears to be off on one side? Top yoke's fine - just appears to be the bottom one. And what handling peculiarities would I be looking for if I rode it?

doh!

missile · Post by **missile** » Sun Sep 07, 2003 11:48 am

remove front wheel insert strong bar through spindle pinch points and lever until both forks line up ........................... then .........

go find some cats eyes to crash on

= pound wise penny foolish springs to mind

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Sun Sep 07, 2003 1:42 pm

that the first time I've heard the word 'spring' being used to describe your speed of mental recall...

missile · Post by **missile** » Sun Sep 07, 2003 4:34 pm

touche, you made me laugh in my senile old age. Seriously sometimes it is safer to buy new bits rather than trust Arthur "it only done 100 dry miles m8" Daily. I guess not all breakers are dodgy, but I have yet to meet one who is not

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 9:40 am

yeah - it's a risk you take buying cheap unfortunately. Said individual has already refunded my cash, so no harm done; just a few hours wasted fitting it.

Mind you, if Honda weren't taking the absolute p*ss for a brand new item, I'd have gone for a 'proper' part - for what is essentially a mass-produced, cast metal part with a metal pole sticking out of it. They were wanting something outragous like Ã‚Â£195 for just the bottom yoke - no bearings, top yoke, bolts etc

Just bought a new starter relay for said CBR; genuine honda new item = Ã‚Â£72! Probably cost about 50p to make...

Cue discussion about cars vs bike part prices...

Euan

Post by **Gazza** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 12:40 pm

You should get a nice cheap Ducati. I just bought an end cap for the handlebar.......

60p inc VAT. :I can't believe it's not butter!

Graeme · Post by **Graeme** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 1:23 pm

Gazza wrote:You should get a nice cheap Ducati (old mans rusty pizza). I just bought an end cap for the handlebar.......

60p inc VAT. :I can't believe it's not butter!

I never knew Smarties had gone up in price

Post by **Gazza** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 3:16 pm

Graeme wrote: I never knew Smarties had gone up in price

Only needed one so I ate the rest! :I can't believe it's not butter!

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 4:44 pm

I thought this was going to be a thread about eggs and how the ones I remember as a kid had bigger yokes!

BuzzOff · Post by **BuzzOff** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:17 pm

That's a terrible yoke.

BuzzOff · Post by **BuzzOff** » Mon Sep 08, 2003 5:23 pm

Seriously, anyone remember that bit in MCN a while back.

They took a new GSXR600 - cost about Ã‚Â£6,500. Ordered the whole bike in spare parts - cost about Ã‚Â£28,000. Even allowing for individual distribution, economy of scale etc. it's still a bit steep.

I had to buy a load of nuts/bolts/fasteners for my TT600. A single SS allen bolt M6 was gonna be about 4 quid!

Went to Bon Accord metals instead for most of the parts.

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 9:04 am

What I guess you have to look at is the way bikes change every 2 years (or less in some instances). Must be a nightmare for the dealers. Totally new engines, frames, swing arms etc with all the associated new bits and bobs..but I must admit, some of the prices charged for things like bolts, crush washers (11p each!!!) etc is outrageous!

I guess the manufacturers have to make money some how to cover the constant development/re-development costs on the bikes. How many people really need to rush out and buy the latest CBSXTTZX 600 coz it makes 0.5 bhp more than last years model and has a 4% stiffer rear end?..I can't believe it's not butter!

Maybe we are our own worst enemy?

Having said that, the cost of bits for my old Volvo company car was shocking....thank god for 3 year warrenties :)

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 3:47 pm

Don't think the dealers are too worried about it to be honest, given the prices are fixed (no pun intended) by honda. They're interested in getting more kit out the door new or old, and servicing has hardly changed in price regardless of model - still takes 2-3 hours. Let the computer handle the larger parts catalogue!

And when you consider that the CBR600 especially still shares a vast number of parts with the last three models you can't even use the 'oh, but it's a new model' arguement either - for example I've just bought a road tailpiece from a 98 to fit on my 2001, and it's still the same bit of plastic now in 2003 - just different paint. Even the main cylinder block goes back to 95 (I think?).

More to the point - you admitted to driving a volvo??!!

yelloisfriedegg · Post by **yelloisfriedegg** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 3:58 pm

silverburn wrote:Just been assembling the CBR in leu of a year-end track day - only to find I've got more lock turning right that I do left! Not by much, but definitely noticable. Forks are frame are straight, so must be the yokes?

Since I've replace most of the front end after cadwell, it now appears the 2nd hand yokes are out - though technically they're supposed to be only a few miles old and perfectly straight! Refund pending of course - I need spot-on front-end geometry for a purely track bike for obvious reasons.

Question is though - can they be bent back if it only appears to be off on one side? Top yoke's fine - just appears to be the bottom one. And what handling peculiarities would I be looking for if I rode it?

doh!

I'm confused here , are you saying that the "lock stops" are uneven ?....do you think one of then is bent , this can happen with even as little as the bike falling over.

Most people racing bikes actually drill and tap the lock stops and put bolts with lock nuts onto them so that they can reduce the effective lock , this in conjunction with a steering damper helps to reduce tank slappers.

The bolts are also easier to change when you bend them when you drop the bike next time (ALL race bikes crash.....eventually

)

This mod also means you can use a smaller (shorter stroke) damper (cheaper in the case of ohlins) as the ACU rules state that the stops must dictate travel , not the steering damper (if fitted)

I would not worry unduly about having exactly the same amount of steering travel on both sides , lets face it , the bars hardley move much at all once you are actually riding.

Lastly , just as a throw away bit of info , the 999 / 749 range has adjustable lockstops as standard , see , value for money these Ducati's :I can't believe it's not butter! .......I actually put that in so that if what I put about bolts and locknuts is unclear you could pop down to Alvins and see how it's done

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Tue Sep 09, 2003 4:23 pm

Silverburn, indeed the 98-2003 has a virtually identical back end, even the pegs and heel plates are the same. There are loads of subtle differences though...my neighbour has a 2002 model and we often sit in the gathering gloom, deck chairs in the garden, comparing bolts over a beer or three

You miss my point though:P ...the manufacturers are constantly trying to out do each other by improving bikes in areas where they dont need improving (speed, acceleration) and neglecting areas that do (quality suspension, finish etc). On the road nobody can use a 400cc + sports bike to its full potential without breaking the law by a long way..so why worry, and i will use Honda as an example, about improving performance on the CBR 600 when it has, relativly speaking, poor forks, a crap rear suspension unit and questionable cam chain tensioners

get the suspension sorted with quality items and it will be a faster bike over a given road :I can't believe it's not butter!

Now,,where is the K&N and Akropovic catalogue?

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 9:11 am

Cheers egg - another excuse to go a gawp at the shiny new bikes at alvins...

Backs - Actually, I've found my SV is a considerably better road bike than my CBR was; softer, longer, heavier, semi-torquey vtwin (I was looking for a 'proper' road bike). Nowhere near as 'flighty' as the CBR, and gives - subjectively - better feedback. Shame about the tank range.

My CBR really comes into it's own at the track though; adjusted standard suspension more than adequate for my (fast group) pace at many of the english circuits. Could just do with more top-end power, but I've changed the gearing recently so that might help.

I take note of your comments on bike manufacturers, with a couple of personal additions:

- fit and finish can actually be very good - when weight saving is not a major factor in the design. Have a look at the finish of a Goldmember or other 'proper' touring beasts, for example - you don't see many of them corroding away to dust. Extra paint, fairings, shaft drives, etc = extra weight.

- 400cc v big cc; aaah, that ol' chestnut...No way would I trade down from my 1000cc vtwin because - and it's been probably been said about million times before - a 1000cc's power is much more usuable on the road than a 400cc (and even a 600 in some cases). No frantic gear changes, no getting caught outside the powerband when overtaking, no scaring the car owners as you scream (slowly) past at 14,000rpm, no worrying about the weight of a pillion (or your own spare tyre and chins) slowing you down, no stalling it at the lights in town etc etc

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 11:41 am

Usable power is subjective

You adapt to a bike..never had a problem with the 400 on overtaking etc, Cassies CB 500 was a hoot and could easily get past cars. What I have found is that when I had the VFR (750 version and the GSXF come to think of it) I became a lazy rider and it was not until I got back on a 600, then a 400 that i realised the bigger bike was boring to ride (bearing in mind I am talking about every day use, not mad blasts and track days).

I dont agree with the more CC's the better...coz if it were true, we would all be riding Harleys

Post by **Zathos** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 12:19 pm

Are we talking about the same bike?
I've never had problems with the CBR suspension on the '03, totally different from earlier models.
The thing just inspires confidence :I can't believe it's not butter! :I can't believe it's not butter!

Post by **Gazza** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 1:11 pm

Backs 400 wrote:Usable power is subjective

I dont agree with the more CC's the better...coz if it were true, we would all be riding Harleys

Bullshit.

Silverburn's argument regarding usable power mentions an SV, not the type of power that an HD makes. Many a time, usuable power has got me out of the shizzle and I like to have it for just such an occasion.

Backs 400 wrote:I became a lazy rider and it was not until I got back on a 600, then a 400 that i realised the bigger bike was boring to ride (bearing in mind I am talking about every day use, not mad blasts and track days).

Well I've ridden dozens of bikes and never found any of them boring, irrespective of cc's. If you're prepared to use what you've got, then bigger bikes can actually be very scary. Definitely not boring.

Finally if I want to be lazy, at least with a bigger bike I have the choice.

If you like riding around wringing the neck off your 400 then get yourself a twist and go scooter. I used to borrow the wife's and I'm sure it was less 'boring' than your 400 (using your own argument). Can't afford to be lazy with one of those.

yelloisfriedegg · Post by **yelloisfriedegg** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 1:42 pm

1000cc's is plenty for anybody......and seldom boring , well not boring ever so far actually :I can't believe it's not butter!

Stop picking on backs , you , you , pickerthingy you :I can't believe it's not butter! , he's bought himself a manly 600 now you know :I can't believe it's not butter!

silverburn · Post by **silverburn** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 2:01 pm

Zathos wrote:Are we talking about the same bike?
I've never had problems with the CBR suspension on the '03, totally different from earlier models.
The thing just inspires confidence :I can't believe it's not butter! :I can't believe it's not butter!

Don't get me wrong; the CBR handles great, even after 12k miles and almost 2 dozen of track days. It's the roads round where i live (West lothian & fife) are narrow, bumpy, full of holes and regularly off-camber etc. SV just seems more 'planted' than the CBR ever was round the same roads.

If you've done the south deeside, they're similar; just add more traffic, more bumps, more rippled resurfacing and futile fixes and you're there. So completely different in other words...oh well...

At this point the whole thread comes full circle, and everyone asks if how can the CBR still handle so well if the bottom yoke is bent....? Well, that's 'cos it handled well BEFORE I twatted it...

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 3:42 pm

Gazza wrote:Many a time, usuable power has got me out of the shizzle and I like to have it for just such an occasion..

And I bet you can't think of one occasion where "power" has got you INTO trouble......hmmmm. There are more dead riders out there who had too much power than not enough

Also, look at what I wrote..."everyday riding", NOT blasts or trackdays..HUGE difference between commuting or going for a run out the road for tea and scones to tearing up the countryside on the latest, greatest bike.

Lastly, where does everyone get this idea that 400's have to have there neck rung?..my CBR does not come alive until about 8k..same as the ZXR..it then picks up again at 12..whilst the ZXR picked up at 10 ish. The CBR infact positivly struggles between 4-6k making overtakes a "two gears down" affair..same as the ZXR...

missile · Post by **missile** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 3:51 pm

I think we have heard all this my 400 is better than your 1,000cc crap before? Now let me think who was it who said it last time?

I guess if you ride like a big girls blouse a 400 is more than enuf

?

Backs 400 · Post by **Backs 400** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 4:47 pm

Amazing how many people only see what they want to see...

Post by **Gazza** » Wed Sep 10, 2003 5:14 pm

Backs 400 wrote:And I bet you can't think of one occasion where "power" has got you INTO trouble......hmmmm. There are more dead riders out there who had too much power than not enough

Like I said.... I like to have the choice. If I want to go fast and die or go slow and live, that's my choice. If I want to go fast and avoid a lorry....That's also my choice.

Backs 400 wrote: Also, look at what I wrote..."everyday riding", NOT blasts or trackdays..HUGE difference between commuting or going for a run out the road for tea and scones to tearing up the countryside on the latest, greatest bike.

Everyday riding is just the time you might like to have the choice.
Anyways, I don't ride everyday and I when I do, I nearly always ride the same. Can't think why I'd buy a 998S to nip down the shops. There's always the wife's twist and go for that....time to really focus.

Backs 400 wrote:Lastly, where does everyone get this idea that 400's have to have there neck rung?..my CBR does not come alive until about 8k..same as the ZXR..it then picks up again at 12..whilst the ZXR picked up at 10 ish. The CBR infact positivly struggles between 4-6k making overtakes a "two gears down" affair..same as the ZXR...

Like I said. Necks wrung! Try riding a big twin with torque all the way from turning the key.

Finally, read carefully and you'll see I never found any bike boring, including the twist and go. I never said small bikes were shizzle. I just objected to the 'big bikes are boring' and'everyone would have a Hardly Davidson' statements.

Funny how people only see what they want to see........

AberdeenBikers

yoke woes

yoke woes

Re: yoke woes