just a thought

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 26, 2009
Messages
2,210
Ok, try and bare with me on this,
We all assume the commando engine via its isos vibrates, i allways considered this the case...but does it?
When the bikes is under load...say two up on an incline ,the rear chain is under load, pulling the iso's back, this is connected to the engine /trans and not direct to the frame, then if the engine attempts to shake back/forth it would have to pull the wheel with it. Now as the wheel/tyre is well and truely " planted/fixed" to the road, under weight, how could the engine push-pull the tyre ,, So doe's the frame vibrate in stead? in a back and forth motion, as the engine can move up and down this means the engine changes from moving up/down then the frame takes over for/aft. just a thought over a cup of tea. :lol:
I suppose i drink to much rosy Lea :roll:
 
Interesting thought. I would say that the engine, trans, and swingarm transmit any forces applied to them to the isos and thence to the frame. Vibrations and some of the forces will be dampened to whatever degree by the rubber inserts. The same could probably be said about forces appled to the framework going back through to the engine cradle. You have a triangle
with dampers at each corner. The damper at the top does not take much force so is rather small in comparison to the front and rear isos. The load applied by the rear wheel and chain is confined to the cradle and then finally transmitted to the isos. It is purley a physics problem with forces applied to a three point mount. Personally, I have never messed with the damping system on my bike. It has always been dead smooth and vibration free for me so I say why mess with it. I have 35 k miles on original isos save for the top pucks which I changed. I have never measured my iso clearances and care not as long as everything continues smoothly. Riders adding all these addition devices that inhibit dampening are merely defeating the purpose intended by the design. If you want a more rigid set up ,solid mount the thing and be done with it. My 2 cents worth.
 
john robert bould said:
...the rear chain is under load, pulling the iso's back, this is connected to the engine /trans and not direct to the frame, then if the engine attempts to shake back/forth it would have to pull the wheel with it.
Since the engine/transmission/swingarm/wheel is one rigid unit (at least in the fore-aft plane), any tension seen between the wheel and transmission through the chain will be contained in this unit. So, as you surmised, the unit can shake fore-and-aft. However, most of the vibration (most) is in the up-and-down axis, and not fore-aft. As relates to the chain pulling the isos back, think of the drive unit as "pushing" the "cockpit" forward, since the drive unit is pushing you forward through the rear wheel.

john robert bould said:
Now as the wheel/tyre is well and truely " planted/fixed" to the road, under weight, how could the engine push-pull the tyre ,, So doe's the frame vibrate in stead?
I suppose i drink to much rosy Lea :roll:

Keep in mind that both the cush drive in the rear hub and the tire sidewalls can allow some rotational differential between the countershaft to the ground, so minor fore-aft shaking would simply flex these two rubber components, just as intended. And, yes; methinks you drink too much, but I'm not sure it's the tea that's doing it! :wink:

Nathan
 
The rear chain being under load makes no difference to the ISO's as the swinging arm is mounted rigidly to the engine/gearbox not the frame. The loads on the ISO's are the engine trying to move up/down, the weight of rider/passenger/engine/gearbox, and the force of the rear wheel against the road under acceleration or braking. Also the bike isn't rigidly mounted to the road, it's rubber mounted via the tyres.

Ian
 
I once heard via a friend ,dare i say les Emery, that the iso lastic unit as two stage rubbers ,the bigger slimmer ones take up the vibes,and the thicker smaller restrict any excessive loading..ie under braking etc...in this case the power plant becomes solid in the fore/aft as the smaller rubbers fully compress. Now as the engine is still trying to vibrate ,and each force is equal in both directions ..something as got to give. I am now on coffee :lol:
 
hobot knows the curse and magic is not in the above confused descritions. Engine oscillations don't engage both iso's. Rear thrust pluses engages both iso's in same plane. Steering loads engage both iso's and headstead but oppositiely - till exceeding counter steering then both isos double load handling in cooperation agasinst the head steady in same vector. Bob Patton 20 yrs ago calcualted the magnitude and foucus points/leverage of these loads to be the first to really tame a Commando. Don't care to upset the learned one's so carry on with magical thinking.
just a thought
 
The original rubbers where not calculted, Bob Trigg stuck in a Trial rubber to see what happened, the first set where to "stiff" the bike ran to 6000 before smoothing out, so he cut them in half, this give 4000 then smooth..then the rubbers where cut again...now 2400 rpm..but the engine was now shaking ..so that was the limit. As with most" designs" a great deal is field work...engineers and the phrase "suck it,and see" are hand in hand for the last 200 years. Then the draftsman appeared to reduce the time /material wastage.




hobot said:
hobot knows the curse and magic is not in the above confused descritions. Engine oscillations don't engage both iso's. Rear thrust pluses engages both iso's in same plane. Steering loads engage both iso's and headstead but oppositiely - till exceeding counter steering then both isos double load handling in cooperation agasinst the head steady in same vector. Bob Patton 20 yrs ago calcualted the magnitude and foucus points/leverage of these loads to be the first to really tame a Commando. Don't care to upset the learned one's so carry on with magical thinking.
just a thought
 
Buggered if I know John....I am obviously not drinking enough tea....time for a brew..... :oops:
 
Isolastic Commando weave wobble almost killed me the first week - once I made it to pavement w/o crashing at low speeds on THE Gravel till I learned to let it snap in/out of counter-straight steering & just leaning more to turn and just hold bars enough to damper tank slapping under 20 mph. Once on hwy I began zooming around enjoying Combat redline till shock of valve float my severely vibrating P!! didn't suffer - so 2 bad shocks that made me swear off sticking with Commandos to decide its only value to me was learning crappy old cycle mechanics with 4 lists of online hand holders > just to refresh stuff and seal oil tight to sell off better and bought the SV650 w/o any the Cdo quirks then took corner school on Ninja. When I complained how stupid handling Commandos were, Phantom Oiler Tom told me I should pow wow with Bob Patton who took pity and explained isolastic dynamics with calculated loads and his ability to hang sharp Mt turns with only one easy fork help then held radius by body English only. SAY WHAT!!! The moderns took lots of athletics to keep from flipping up or falling down, depending on whether a V-twin on inline 4 CoG influence.

Bob explained that Commando action is based around the rear isolastic, engine hops up/dn on front iso to pivot a bit on rear iso & turn loads were leveraged from rear contact pivoting through rear iso into side thrusts on the front iso gap. Patton solution was the low rear link to try to stabilize-resist rear patch slapping forks silly into a wobble that wags back to tail till full weave 'Hinge' onset, that can actually hop front or rear tire off surface if pressing hard enough, UGH. Same thing hit me on the V-twin and I-4 but at rather faster harsher loads than a stupid isolastics could approach but then hits so severely a human can't move fast or strong enough to react too.

Bob kept measuring alignments over seasons of use to find the iso cushions take set and sag after a time which misalinged his low-rear link, so he stuffed in 6 big cushions in rear and reported it helped everything, isolation to road stability ease. Following his lead Peel had 4 big cushions in rear but I decided to bevel front iso's after reasoning they didn't do much but take up engine hip/hops. Pleasant surprise was Peel isolated very smooth about 1800 rpm - with tires aired to 28 lb rear/26 lb front. Then creep-ed up on PSI, finding Peel always liked 2-3 lb less in front to get easiest steering sense. Peel isolated lower and lower the higher I went till 58/56 PSI she disappeared just off idle ~1200 rom ike Frank Damp said his test bed Commando did. This hard tire play revealed how much isolation depended on the frimness of frame to ground contact. So much so I could tell a low leak before handling-effort disturbed by the sense of engine hints getting through on power let offs. Only reason I didn't exceed 60 lbs was how harsh-rough and loose THE Gravel travel got through suspension but no engine buzz sense.

About this time I got more confidence off road to point was leaping off creek banks into creek beds, catching air shooting off ledge drops and then the other way jump ramps up to 50-60 mph - to get hit with butt-teeth buzz till she landed again and smoothed out. This was an uncannty non-sense experience with tires planted on rough Gravel to feel like my Lexus LS 400 with factory sports suspension but harsh lawn mower vibes while air borne then instant smoothness & control on landings, Weird Weird Weird as opposite my handy as hell SuVee, which could not take the loads I learned to crave on Peel so poor SV got neglected and loaned out to anyone who'd take it - from drug crazed teenage hicks to mature city living, blind in one eye newbie hoping it'd get sold to put back in Peel's deal.

There's a 35' river Gravel climb out I test all my craft traction on, bench mark was my torquy chevy V8 4wd chevy PU with 411 ratio differentials, rear posi-lock on mudder lug + ice spiked tires the lugs throw thrust back in 4 jets as ice spikes dig down to solid embeded rocks in hard base - could hit 65 mph, sedans could only hit 45 max or just spun, SV 50 mph on heated soft race tire till just spun, Trixie Combat 55 till spun too much but Peel hit 75 mph and still accelerating only limited by having to let off in time to hook the 120' sharp turn at top w/o using brakes which just snatch ya down on THE Gravel.

I think what makes Peel so effective in hook up is the isolastics acting like power pulse dampeners and the tr-links keeping rear more aligned to thrust rather than wiggling a tad out of line like on Trixie that made her want to snap down in lost traction, but still getting some hook up dampening that could beat my SuVee solid frame hook up.

Gotta go now but state that one can't really say much about their isolastics till tires about perfect condition and air balanced, then still a death trap if trying to play real racer load games un-tammed.
 
the prediction:

any second now and one multiposter will chime in to entertain us about his miracleous Seeley and another one about the marvels of ms Peel .


comes true, well done

I think what makes Peel so effective in hook up is the isolastics acting like power pulse dampeners and the tr-links keeping rear more aligned to thrust rather than wiggling a tad out of line like on Trixie that made her want to snap down in lost traction, but still getting some hook up dampening that could beat my SuVee solid frame hook up.

 
Nortoniggy said:
The rear chain being under load makes no difference to the ISO's as the swinging arm is mounted rigidly to the engine/gearbox not the frame. The loads on the ISO's are the engine trying to move up/down, the weight of rider/passenger/engine/gearbox, and the force of the rear wheel against the road under acceleration or braking. Also the bike isn't rigidly mounted to the road, it's rubber mounted via the tyres.

Ian

Every time there is a pulse from the engine through the chain to the rear wheel, it might not affect the relationship between the rear axle and the crankshaft, however the whole engine and gearbox assembly vibrated backwards and forwards in response. Energy is absorbed in the rubbers instead of moving the bike. The loss of power is obviously not great or the rubbers in the isolastics would deteriorate rapidly. However the tyre recovery is affected. That factor is the reason that single cylinder four strokes have a different feel to twins. The way the power is delivered also affects the way the bike can be ridden, near it's limit. For myself, I have zero tolerance for flex between the steering head and the rear tyre contact patch. Replacing the silentbloc bushes with bronze in the pivot of a featherbed frame can make a difference which can be felt by the rider.
 
1up3down said:
the prediction:

any second now and one multiposter will chime in to entertain us about his miracleous Seeley and another one about the marvels of ms Peel .

You were almost right. No mention of Seeley but this baffling statement instead from someone who has never owned or ridden a Commando.


acotrel said:
Every time there is a pulse from the engine through the chain to the rear wheel, it might not affect the relationship between the rear axle and the crankshaft, however the whole engine and gearbox assembly vibrated backwards and forwards in response. Energy is absorbed in the rubbers instead of moving the bike. The loss of power is obviously not great or the rubbers in the isolastics would deteriorate rapidly. However the tyre recovery is affected. That factor is the reason that single cylinder four strokes have a different feel to twins. The way the power is delivered also affects the way the bike can be ridden, near it's limit. For myself, I have zero tolerance for flex between the steering head and the rear tyre contact patch. Replacing the silentbloc bushes with bronze in the pivot of a featherbed frame can make a difference which can be felt by the rider.


The isolastics cause power loss? Really? Gosh

Ian
 
The iso's pair in ling of road thrusts seem to absorb the sharpness of power pulses that might other wise chirp tire a bit which may not re-grip before its chirped one more time to many. If anything the isolastics energy stealing pays back in better hook up. Don't matter at all until maxing out traction on various surface conditions. The closer to tire edge > this little benefit can suddenly make all the difference. The less nuisance vibes getting in way of pilot sense of tire patch the better. You know my tool of choice silly as that seems. An 'long' air borne cycle lets ya feel the dampening down efficiency of its front and rear suspension oscillations, but on the Commando power unit mass gets more more still-unresisted so frame mass shakes as much or more till tires ground again. The upsets on cycles by far occur quite suddenly yet the isolastics seem to slow upsets down - until too much loading/unloading oscillations have time to build up, so no upsets at all with isolastics - if the rebounding and sharp spikes don't occur.

Apparently Harley Ableson inherited a few ex-Norton designers but Brian Slark curator of Barber's museum lectured at L.o.P. on the Evolution engine head and its rubber cushions and links as patents from Bernard Hopper. Slip into one the stadium size Harley vendors and hunt down their head mechanic or manic mechanic riders and quizz them on which model is the best handling and why and what they add to make em behave.

just a thought

just a thought
 
hobot said:
Slip into one the stadium size Harley vendors and hunt down their head mechanic or manic mechanic riders and quizz them on which model is the best handling and why and what they add to make em behave.

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php?topic=25417.0

http://www.cvoharley.com/smf/index.php? ... #msg411492
The FXR was never meant to be a “crotch rocket”, always maintaining the goal of working within the frame work structure of Harley Davidson. At each design level the engineering design team pushed the envelope of “modern performance” whenever possible and where practical, to make it “stiffer and give it more precise steering” affirmed Rit Booth. The frame was designed using the latest in computer-assisted technology. In the process known as "finite element analysis", the frame configuration, specifications, and dimensions were fed into a computer. A “drawing” of the frame could then be brought up on a computer display “terminal”. The computer then assisted the engineering team in changing the frame characteristics until they were able to come up with the optimum design. Among other things, the computer assisted them in locating stress points and indicated where the frame needed stiffening. Using this stress analysis and computer modeling, “Team FXR” designed the new frame for maximum stiffness. Like the FLT frame, the new frame’s backbone was comprised of two-inch boxed tubular steel with massive stampings to add strength creating a large box-section that linked the steering head to a triangulated rear section and used round tubing at all points where the frame showed. To make the new frame even stiffer than the FLT’s the engineers added more gusseting between the steering head and both the backbone and down tubes. In the end, it was claimed to be 5 times stiffer than the old FX frame, yet added nothing in weight. Like the FLT, the FXR Super Glide II mates the smooth and quick 5 speed gear box with a vibration-isolating Tri-mount chassis. With the vibration eliminated and the wider choice of the shorter gearing of the 5 speed, the FXR would cruise effortlessly. In fact the gearing and lack of vibration tend to make the motorcycle reach engine speeds that were significantly above those to which riders were accustomed on the traditional HD 4 speed. Even today as one rides the 1999 FXR2, FXR3, or 2000 FXR4 with 2.925 final gearing the cycle is extremely comfortable at 3,600 RPM and still accelerates strongly beyond.

The Tri-mount chassis adapted from the new FLT also utilized the maintenance-free, automotive type elastomer mounts, one in front and two in the rear at the swing arm junctions with the transmission, This was a departure from the traditional rigid mounting of the engine to the frame in which case the engine was generally a stressed member of the chassis. The elastomer mounts basically allows the engine to do its thing (shake) without transmitting that vibration through the frame and on to the rider. Thus the term, “isolated vibration”. The FXR Super Glide II featured 6.12 inch of ground clearance and a long wheel base of 65.7 inches. Rake was 30 degrees, while the trail came in at 4.7 inches all of which led the FXR into any corner without fear. It would be right here where HD would spend their greatest time modifying the FXR riding experience to capture the greatest amount of riders. While never modifying the chassis/frame, one year marketing side would cut the fork tubes down and make the rear shocks shorter and as quickly as that was decided upon the engineers would step back in the next year with the tension to take it the other direction, in the end it would be viewed as a sea of compromise one year the engineers would be victorious while yet in another the marketing side would see to it that the bike went to a lower stance. At no time did this "sea of compromise" affect the uniquely wonderful riding experience in terms of the FXR comfort factor, what was constantly being debated however, was just how aggressive HD riders were willing to become as they entered into the curves with a frame/chassis that knew no fear. Time and substance out distanced fast and furious and so it is that HD continues to allow us to dream while we cruise.

============================

To this end, Mark Tuttle exclaims, we all loved the bike, “You could run it into a corner and tip it over to oblivion and it just all worked”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top