Aftermarket head steadys

Status
Not open for further replies.
I still think mine is the better design .
Light , ultra compact , no moving parts to wear out .. and dirt cheap .
Works perfect .
Only drawback is you 'll have to make it yourself .

Aftermarket head steadys


Aftermarket head steadys


Spring is optional :

Aftermarket head steadys
closest shell
 
I built one of those Keith joint head steadys and I guess it's OK. I even managed to get the spring on the thing which helped with the low end vibes, but I'll say after just a couple months with the original early HS, the iso rubbers in the front mount had already taken a set of about 1/4" or more. On the early bikes the engine sags down in the iso's because of the way the center stand is mounted on the frame. As far as vibration goes, I couldn't tell the diff. But after all that time building the thing, the CNW one I would like better. I enjoy making things anyhow and it was an experience. I made mine out of aluminum.
 
ludwig said:
I still think mine is the better design .
Light , ultra compact , no moving parts to wear out .. and dirt cheap .
Works perfect .
Only drawback is you 'll have to make it yourself .

Aftermarket head steadys


Aftermarket head steadys


Spring is optional :

Aftermarket head steadys
closest shell
Click to expand...
ludwig,
What s the wire running to the back between the carbs that is attached to the head steady?
your system looks like the lightest.
Cheers,
Thomas
 
ludwig said:
I still think mine is the better design .
Light , ultra compact , no moving parts to wear out .. and dirt cheap .
Works perfect .
Only drawback is you 'll have to make it yourself .

Aftermarket head steadys


Aftermarket head steadys


Spring is optional :

Aftermarket head steadys
Click to expand...

But,... by using only 2 screws into the head, you're only using 2 points of contact which can define a weakness to resisting rotation along the line that defines those 2 contact points. Had you made the base plate to include the third non linear contact point already existing in the head, then the base plate attached to the head would be less susceptible to perpendicular force along the line of the 2 head bolts that you currently have in use.
 
Matchless said:
On the 920 I'm using the Jim Comstock type from CNW, along with the bracket & adjustable valve spring under the front mount, which I copied from Jim. The set up works perfectly.

Martyn.
Click to expand...
Any pics Martyn ?

Cheers,

cliffa
 
Other than for out and out racebikes, do any of these headsteadies do a better job than the MK3 stocker?
It's pretty light and strong, seems to keep vibration at bay, which is getting to be my main concern as I age.
I really hate riding the shakers!





Glen
 
Last edited:
worntorn said:
do any of these headsteadies do a better job than the MK3 stocker?
Click to expand...

Certainly there is angular force from the engine connection on to the frame from laying the bike over regardless of which headsteady you use. The question would be if that angular force would change the coefficient of friction at the frame mounting joint of each type of headsteady differently to make one, or some of them, transfer greater amounts of "up and down" motion to the frame.

Pretty obviously the stock headsteadies would transfer the most "up and down" force since it's not a true isolastic connection, but just a rubberized joint. Ludwig's headsteady has a single isolastic arm with friction reducing material sandwiching his connection, so it's certainly better than the stock headsteady. The Production racer is a true isolastic mount with 2 arms capturing the frame and friction reducing material to reduce the transfer of "up and down" motion to the frame. I would bet it's the most rigid latterally and when set up correctly doesn't transfer much engine motion to the frame.

Both of the "rose joint" style headsteadies have a pair of perpendicular ball joint arms to connect the frame to the engine. There's no question that they transfer the least "up and down" motion to the frame at the headsteady connection because of the angle of their connections and offset of the lever arm between those connections doesn't allow the transfer of up and down force.
 
Last edited:
That stock unit looks pretty isolastic to me.
"The rubber biscuits in an isolastic mount are about as close to hanging in space as you can get without doing away with gravity.".
Jim Comstock, from the Wayback machine, in reference to the Mk3 head steady before he designed and made his own head steady.
I can see that the stock unit might offer a little flop around that could adversely affect handling for some, or at least make the rider think it does( are we really that fast?)
As far as transmitting vibes to the rider with the stock MK3 headsteady, there really are none above 3 k.
Is this true with the various upgraded headsteadies?

Glen
 
Last edited:
do any of these headsteadies do a better job than the MK3 stocker?..
================================

Rod linkage head steadys like the CNW or Dave Taylor allow the head/motor to rotate up and down and fore and aft but most importantly they do not allow any,
zero, side to side movement. This is in contrast to the rubber connections to the frame top tube that do allow side to side because rubber gives and deteriorates.
I was amazed by the significant handling difference when I first installed a Dave Taylor many years ago. I now have the CNW which as many have said is much more robust, no messing with for life set up.
 
So in upgrading to one of these head steadies expect a handling improvement and no increase in vibration?

Glen
 
worntorn said:
So in upgrading to one of these head steadies expect a handling improvement and no increase in vibration?

Glen
Click to expand...

In theory. In reality is a couple thou movement at the head going to be discernible with all the other bits flopping around?
 
worntorn said:
So in upgrading to one of these head steadies expect a handling improvement and no increase in vibration?

Glen
Click to expand...
A very noticeable handling improvement in my case, with no change in vibration - from Standard 1974 headsteady to Dave Taylor.
Then replaced the old Iso's with new Andover adjustable ones and the vibes dissappeared, then changed to 90/90 tyre on the front and the steering became much sharper.
YMMV etc.
 
the handling difference that the rod linkage head steadies provide is that they prohibit the head/motor from falling off to the side with leaned over
 
Little until you find yourself in an "oh sh_t" situation and you need every bit of help you can get.
Remember the Incomers Season is beginning...
 
  • Like
Reactions: baz
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top