Fork Springs - Best source?

Status
Not open for further replies.
hobot said:
Yes and you also got stuck with poor grade of Castwell tank seal too while Wes and my tanks holding up. I am not out to mislead anyone nor pump me up but I can't tell ya how harsh I've treated Peel on purpose then even worse by accident crashing through goopher holes or landing on nose stopped short on my helmet leaping a 5 ft bank to catch air but landing at top in a ft deep wash out rut tall grass hid. Forks survived perfectly, much to my own horrified amazement. Peel forks disappeared miles of wash boards and crap on THE Gravel that jars and chatters regular roadholders and Race Teched Suzuki forks so I sit back to unload wrists on their forks while still gripping almost white knucked to prevent constant snatch outs. Liked Peel's forks better than MX bikes I was lent so gave up on the dirt bikes in more pleased amazement. Maybe its our weight difference? Regardless of fork travel support, still suggest you try a strong spring spacer some day. I've kept Trixie bone stock on purpose and found she just ain't up to the off road flings or hwy sports games nor keeping her tire down on squeal braking. I've also got the feed back from Greg Fauth & customers too, so ain't just me thank goodness. I am definitely stifled in my cornering hobby till money/time enough to get Peel going again.

There is no question there are quite a few people using extended damping rods. Greg was aware of my failure also when it happened. You are probably going to get away with it under most circumstances but with the dire consequences of a failure I don't want to be the one recommending that mod. Plus I prefer the quick low input steering you get with stock trail. Jim
 
Ok cool glad you pow wowed with Greg. I understand your conservative position and reasons. Peel's forks collapsed by mere hand pressure at full 6" extension so in her case impossible to put shear loads on w/o good bush over lap. I don't think I could take any harsher testing and crashings that removed fork stop til just left it off, [next Peel has crash frame stops] so in real fear to impact stuff flying off on fully extended forks, ugh. No fork can stand some bad level of dead on impact but that's what it'd take to test Peel's harder. Our experiences differ and you may be right but I'm looking forward to more of Peel's Steve McQueen scenes on the rutted and cratered sea of pasture I opened up a path to this year. I have so wanted to sanely ride up to it on Trixie but not sure I could make it the last steep part over ice storm limbs. Anywho I can not use nor looking for anything better, sorry I'm no help but do hope you'all can find similar joys as me to flash on and quiver.
 
Just to be clear, my bike already has the Fauth conversion. I loved what it did for the bike. Mainly, since I weigh 265 naked and push 300 in leathers/boots/helmet, it picked the front end up maybe 1.5" and helped ground clearance a lot.

When I stupidly left the bike tied down in the back of the truck, the springs sacked out, I was again bottoming the forks when braking over bumps, and I lost that increased ground clearance and started dragging the pipes again.
 
Jim C. is spot on about the lack of overlap with the roadhoalder forks but odds are it should not be an issue for xbackslider provided you keep the wheel balanced, on the ground and with a little more sag.

Being a bit of a contrarian, I had good performance with a progressively wound set of front fork springs (from Progressive) on my race Commando. I am figuring the bike weighed in at about 380 lbs and me with leathers was another 230 lbs at the time.

The springs were from Progressive:

http://www.progressivesuspension.com


I recall the springs I used were for an XR500 and I used maybe 3/4" preload with PVC spacers. No bottoming and no topping. Your results will vary.
 
ludwig said:
There seems to be a misunderstanding by some how progressive springs work .
It is not so that the closer windings ( soft section) get compressed till coil bound and then the harder section takes over .
Both sections are compressed at the same time .
This means that for most so called progressive springs , there is no progressive action at all within the normal operating range .
If you want real progressive spring action , you need 2 springs , like Hobot , but with a spacer tube inside the shorter spring .
for ex : a 3 cm spring ( an inner valve spring is a good candidate ) with a 2 cm inner spacer .
The spacer will make the short spring solid after 1cm compression , well before coil bound .
This will provide a well defined cross over point , depending on spring rate , spacer length , etc ..
It will take some calculation and bench testing before installing them in the fork .
Get to work , hobot !

Even with a two spring system both springs compress at the same time, only at different displacements for the given load. Try it and see. :)

No fatal flaw with either a two spring system or a progressively wound spring. With a two spring system you have more ability to mix, match and test. With a Progressive spring you can experiment by cutting and preloading but it can be messy.
 
A spring can be manufactured to have one or more fairly distinctive cross over rates, the question is why would one do this, unless there was a specific need for distinct cross overs.

Early WORKS performance aluminum bodied rear shocks came to me with a two spring sytem and a plastick slider. It may or may not have had the "blocking out" ability that you refer to, I cannot recall. I have since changed them out with progressive wound springs now that I know what I need. Both systems work.

Even with a progressive wound spring you can experiment with compounding and blocking out as you describe above.
 
Just remember, if you decide to go to Landownes kits in the future, you will need standard springs to funtion properly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top