Building an Ohlins Shock

p400 said:

What is the Öhlins number on the softer spring?

How firm are you on the 6mm/25.5mm of static/rider sag with a 00360-06 spring/HD022 with 10mm of preload on Mk3 roadster?

Click to expand...

The 360-05, 360-06 and 360-07 are slightly progressive their starting points are:

360-05 18 Nmm
360-06 20 Nmm
360-07 25 Nmm

I am not sure how you assumed 10 mm of preload, I set the 360-06 spring at about 15mm spring preload (10 turns on the adjuster from zero) before sending them to Ken
I would guess he measured the sag at that setting, no reason to change it before measuring the sag

The stock Norton spring is a 22 Nmm.

For the same weight rider we are able to use a softer spring, for a few reasons.
First we have 12 Bar of pressure in the shocks, that acts as a spring
Second we have more compression damping, the stock shock has almost none, so we do not have to rely on just the springs to keep from using all the shock travel.
Third The HD022 shock has a lot of travel, it is 91 mm, more than the stock shock which has 83 mm , that is very hard to get that much travel in a 330 mm long shock. This also allows a softer spring
If you can use a softer spring, the ride will improve.
An Example is the Nitron, having 77 mm, It will be interesting to see if it is 330 mm or longer, looking at it, I suspect it is longer, Robss will tell us if that is the case.

Dan,
Are the HD764 shocks 13 inches eye to eye? I don't need any kind of modification other than the right springs for 171 lbs no gear.

Schwany said:

Dan,
Are the HD764 shocks 13 inches eye to eye? I don't need any kind of modification other than the right springs for 171 lbs no gear.

Click to expand...

the HD764 are a length adjustable shock. the range is 336 mm to 346 mm 13.23 inches to 13.62 inches.

With a little machining they can be made 2 to 4 mm shorter

Shock stroke is 91 mm

Still doing work on picking the right springs, right now it is looking like the 360-05 for 171 lbs.

Dan Kyle said:

the HD764 are a length adjustable shock. the range is 336 mm to 346 mm 13.23 inches to 13.62 inches.

With a little machining they can be made 2 to 4 mm shorter

Shock stroke is 91 mm

Still doing work on picking the right springs, right now it is looking like the 360-05 for 171 lbs.

Click to expand...

Thanks, sounds like they would work length wise for my use without the machine work. .11 of an inch isn't critical in my opinion. It's not like I plan to break the land speed record.

Excuse the question about the length. Ohlins lists them at 13 inches +10mm -0 using the length adjuster, and I missed that on their site before asking. Oops

I might weigh in closer to 185 suited up with backpack. Bike is a nearly vertical shock P11 not a Commando. Always solo on the P11.

No need to respond. I'll be in touch through email later.

I would have thought that with the longer travel, and corresponding softer spring, any small unladen height issue would disappear as soon as the bike was sat on...

p400 said:

Click to expand...

Great picture, I love the background.
The Ohlins shock with a traditional Ohlins Yellow spring also looks great.
What is the back story on the picture?

Your bike?
What Ohlins shock was used?
What length?
What spring rate?
I assume since the shocks are on the bike, it was a huge improvement in both ride and bike control.
They certainly look better.
Thanks again for posting it.

Please purchase your Norton Öhlins products from Kyle Racing.
You want the best, so work with the best.

So here is data to date on Mk3.

Great info, Thanks
For those who do not know, the CC series Ohlins shocks are made for "Classic MX" bikes.
They used to make, I think 6 different ones, different lengths, as well as a piggyback version
Now we are down to 3, two different length monotube shocks, and one piggyback.
as it states it started life as a CC 60X, modified, I assume the stroke as well as the length were changed.
P400, did you also change the stroke to less than the 105mm shown above?
Was the damping spec changed as well? It does not seem like there would have been a need to do that

They run a range of springs, this was changed to a 360 series as they are a shorter spring than the original
The current versions run springs from 12-14.3 Nmm on the CC 606 and CC 607 to a 15-24 Nmm spring on the CC 718
The standard valving is the same for all three shocks, regardless of the spring differences. Gives you an idea of the range of springs that the same damping can be
used for.
The standard damping spec is slightly different than the HD 022 spec, the CC 60X series having just some small changes that would increase the compression and rebound damping, slightly.

Can these be had with the remote reservoir?

jeffdavison said:

Can these be had with the remote reservoir?

Click to expand...

Yes either a remote reservoir or a piggyback .

We should be able to mount either the remote or piggyback as shown in the picture or "upsidedowm" as in P400's picture of them on the P11



All of these shocks will fit.

Update on Mk3 Öhlins 00360-06 sag sheet.
170lb rider street clothes.

How does this compare with other style/brand rear shocks set up on an Interstate with fuel?

Here is a blank form to help sort measurements.

Carrying on with the shock fitting on the MK3 I described earlier, I wanted to try a little less preload on the 00360-06 springs before trying the -05 springs, but didn't have much clearance between the adjuster nut and the chain guard. Dan kindly sent me a pair of offset top spring caps that moved the spring higher on the shock, letting me move the adjuster nut higher on the shock body, even with less preload. To recap previous results, I had installed the shocks with 15 mm of preload (10 turns of the adjuster), and had 6 mm static sag and 25 mm rider sag, and it felt too stiff in the test ride. Using Dan's caps, I set the preload at 11 mm (8 turns on the adjuster) and had 11 mm static sag and 30 mm rider sag. And plenty of clearance between the adjuster nut and the chain guard. The pictures show the custom top spring caps, and the top and bottom of the shock, showing plenty of clearance at both ends.







I'm not putting the data in the form P400 posted, because I'm still sorting out setup. I need to do some test rides to get the best setup with this spring, and then try it with the -05 spring. I'm also having some concerns with the front setup, which I think mostly stem from using way too soft a spring. I'll be fitting some new springs and sorting that out as well. I'm also planning to install the Ohlins front fork cartridge conversio. When I have setups that work properly, I'll post the info on both front and rear.

Ken

Here are my bottom mounts for CC60series. This pair is probably 15 years old and been revised many times for other bikes.
The challenge on my Mk3 was the right side caliper bracket, 10.5mm of spacers to the inside.
About 0.015" clearance on either 00201-12 cylinder head. Also used thin nyloc nuts on stock bolts.

The left side uses one 3.5mm spacer

Dan Kyle said:

I have also looked at the forks, it is possible to install Ohlins NIX 22 Kits in the Norton forks.


I also mounted up an Ohlins damper, we will have these in silver and black.
And it fits with the stock coils.

]

Click to expand...

Just seeing this now - have you checked the clearance to the steering damper at full jounce? I have smashed the fender while using a shorter spacer than what you are showing. HTH

Derek Wilson said:

Just seeing this now - have you checked the clearance to the steering damper at full jounce? I have smashed the fender while using a shorter spacer than what you are showing. HTH

Click to expand...

I made a piece of teflon tube into a 112 mm long spacer to check clearance. I did shorten the spacer as the shorter the better.
So now there is at least 114 mm clearance. Fork travel on an OEM fork is 110 mm. Thanks, I might not have shortened that spacer without your input.

p400 said:

Here are my bottom mounts for CC60series. This pair is probably 15 years old and been revised many times for other bikes.
The challenge on my Mk3 was the right side caliper bracket, 10.5mm of spacers to the inside.
About 0.015" clearance on either 00201-12 cylinder head. Also used thin nyloc nuts on stock bolts.

The left side uses one 3.5mm spacer


View attachment 18498View attachment 18499

Click to expand...

I am trying to avoid using any type of spacer on the inside mount of the shock, as that puts it out of alignment with the top mount.
The shock is designed to have some misalignment and still work. That is done with either spherical bearings, or a rubber bushing.

So far I have been able to use other means to get the shock clearances that are needed. The CC series shock uses spherical bearing that allow more misalignment than the rubber bushings.

Dan Kyle said:

I am trying to avoid using any type of spacer on the inside mount of the shock, as that puts it out of alignment with the top mount.
The shock is designed to have some misalignment and still work. That is done with either spherical bearings, or a rubber bushing.

So far I have been able to use other means to get the shock clearances that are needed. The CC series shock uses spherical bears that allow more misalignment than the rubber bushings.

Click to expand...

Have you got a photo of a Mk3 right side lower mount with an Öhlins please?
I am not visualizing the ability to clear the Mk3 caliper bracket with head/cylinder down design.
I see Ken has got a revised Mk3 caliper mount using a long hose with another caliper.

p400 said:

Have you got a photo of a Mk3 right side lower mount please?
I am not visualizing the ability to clear the Mk3 caliper bracket with head/cylinder down design.
I see Ken has got a revised Mk3 caliper mount using a long hose with another caliper.

Click to expand...

I do not have a MK3 here.
Here is a picture from the internet