| Author | Message | ||
     Warlizard |
My suspension knowledge is weak at best. I read somewhere that our bikes rear shock is backwards from most other manufacturers. If so, is our setup better, or theirs? Does anyone make a shock if I wanted to flip mine around? Has anyone done this? | ||
| Djkaplan |
Hyper-pro makes a linkage so you can use a conventional shock, but it's extremely expensive. I don't believe the tuber pull-shock system was actually designed as an improvement over a conventional system, more just as a way of packaging everything in a bike with a small frame and large engine. It has no innate advantages over any other single shock system other than the fact that it's not in the way. I like the 'trick' factor of the location, but you really need a high quality damper with this system... the Showas and to a lesser extent, th White Power dampers (based on other's insights, I've never ridden a WP equipped Buell) have not been up to par. The Penske I upgraded to has been spectacular, but I've been told by other Penske users that it still isn't as compliant as the best conventional systems on other bikes. Works good enough for me though. | ||
| Ratbuell |
By "backwards", the shock gets longer as the bike gets lower (i.e. goes over a bump) and shorter as the bike gets higher. Most bikes are the opposite, getting shorter as the bike lowers and longer as it raises. I agree, the stockers leave quite a bit to be desired...mainly the ability to be user-rebuilt. I run a Penske on my S1W and a Works on my S2 - both are light-years ahead of the stockers, and both are user-rebuildable if they start to leak. Al at American Sportbike can fix you up with either of the aftermarket shocks if you have the need ;) | ||
| Scott_in_nh |
By "backwards", the shock gets longer as the bike gets lower (i.e. goes over a bump) and shorter as the bike gets higher. Most bikes are the opposite, getting shorter as the bike lowers and longer as it raises. While that is true, it should be noted that the spring still compresses in the normal manner under load | ||
| Xldevil |
This might help: http://lightning.prohosting.com/~buells2t/shock.htm From my point of view,I can really recommend the push linkage conversion shock by Wilbers.Best upgrade for your Buell. Ralph  | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
Isn't that just a huge pile of extra weight? the stock pull-shocks are normal shocks inside with the outside can acting as a reversal. | ||
| Warlizard |
XL - Very nice find on that article. Answered all of my questions. BTW - Exceptional bike, one of the best I've seen. | ||
| Werewulf |
years ago, i remember someone eliminating the shock and putting a solid rod there... ill bet it was not for the faint of heart.. | ||
| Cyclonemduece |
drag racers do it, i wouldnt do it on the street | ||
| Djkaplan |
The Buell pull shock system is essentially identical in concept to the Softail Harley suspension that has been in production since 1984. That concept itself was developed by a private entity and purchased by the Company. I'm almost certain I've seen a similar layout on an earlier, pre-WWII bike also. There is a very small amount of rising rate with this layout, but it's not tuneable for it like more sophisticated linkage systems are. I believe that Wilbers system is identical to the Hyper-pro system. | ||
| Djkaplan |
http://lightning.prohosting.com/~buells2t/shock.ht m I've seen this link before. I'm not so sure I agree with most of it, however. | ||
| Jos51700 |
His theory assumes that the extension shock is fixed on one end, and that all vertical movement in the opposite end of the shock is accomplished through flexure of the piston rod. This is simply not true. The extension shock is no more susceptible to internal binding or flexing than any other. | ||
| Djkaplan |
The diagram is misleading and incorrect. I don't believe any of the information on that website is based on anything but the guy's opinion. He does a good job of presenting his opinion as fact though, and it is a nice endorsement for Hyper-pro. |
