We got "Crap" roads around here in the Midwest too...I began running least Spring Compression and Soft Dampening Rate on my '94 R100GS/PD (w/Ohlins) some years ago to compensate for the irregular surfaces one encounters. The GS just floated over the "Crap" and wiggled it's "Fish-Flop" frame in response...my response was always to "let it have it's own head"...don't fight it!

I've continued this strategy on my R1100S (Wilbers on both ends) and it has served me well. I know this is the very opposite of what most consider good suspension setup but on real "Crap" roads and "normal" speeds it works for me.

i believe this is incorrect...

Thanks Feds27 and RoLoo for your input and everyone else.
The mods to the Ohlins suspension that can be done are great.
I will find a solution to this floating feeling, and the suspension is the only thing that can do it. I think I will start with a heavier spring, so I can have less preload dialed in and more spring movement, but I am convinced that the shaft on the 12s is working differently than the shaft on the 11s, because of the pivot points and the way it is attached to the bike are different. And because of this it is not working with the front as well as it did on the 11s. To try and explain it is like a scissor action or sea saw effect, where I didn't get this out the 11s even with the original suspension.


Thanks

Yes, I would imagine that the engineers at BMW probably just decided to flip the paralever design upside-down, without any regard for or thought to its effect on the suspension action.

Much like they switched to the duo-lever on a whim without any testing at all...

:rolleyes:

Having the torque arm mounted on top of the Paralever rather than on the bottom should not result in any adverse reaction in the rear suspension. If the shock were mounted in exactly the same position on the Paralever in both cases, the top mounted torque arm would only cause a very slight increase in shock travel over the later situation. All of the same rules of suspension setup will apply equally in both cases. You should take extra care to get the correct sag and damping settings on the front and rear and you should be good to go. That being said, it can take a fair amount of fiddling to get everything dialed in just right.

17nm is definitely a bit heavy for an approx 85kg rider
Pretty good for a 95k rider though (even then, maybe a tick stiff, but about right)

You can't compare rates to any other bike unless it has the same wheelbase, weight distribution, linkage ratio, swingarm ratio etc etc.

And yes, Öhlins essentially labels their rate twice on every spring. Once in code, and once in Nm (which shifting the decimal, and allowing for a 2% error, is pretty much the same number as other springs which tend to be rated in units of kg/mm)

Went back to basics last night. Burnt the midnight oil and set the static sag again on my bike. Went to book settings on the shocks. Rang a machanic mate of mine this morning to varify which way you dile the rebound knob. The book says clockwise but on a Ohlins web page I looked at it showed it turning the the anti clockwise. So to put the record straight. Look at the shock side on. 90 degrees and turn from right to left, which is dialing it in all the way, then backed it off 16 clicks. Did the same for the front. Went for a ride today and can say it is ok, but I was not pushing it. The problem I get is when the pace starts to get up over 120km on underlation. Like some say it is just a matter of small alterations to get it right.

> So to put the record straight.
> Look at the shock side on. 90 degrees
> and turn from right to left,
> which is dialing it in all the way,

NO! Respectfully; wrong wrong wrong. It sets the record backasswards.

Man, many are making this damping adjustment too hard. I'll try to help.
(though it's already been covered in many threads here, which might be helpful to search and read instead of posting on a 'new' problem) But anyway...


In ALL cases in ALL Öhlins (or any other shock I've ever seen, which is hundreds and hundreds per year) turning the knob IN (clockwise) increases the damping force)

The only trick is that you have to look at it from the knob's perspective.
On an R11S front shock, the rebound damping knob is on the top (which is quite unusual)
Turning it clockwise will increase damping. On any shock I've ever seen or heard of with a needle or barrel adjuster (axis perpendicular to the shock axis) whether rebound or compression, CW is IN, which is MORE damping.

On the many shocks that have the rebound adjusted by a concentric ring at the lower shock shaft (most Öhlins, later Penskes, FOX, Wilbers and most better shocks in general) you just have to realize you need to view it from the bottom of the shock and that turning it IN / CW (as always) will INCREASE the damping. This is an easy and simple way to look at it. It requires no exceptions or rules or reverse thinking. View knobs and screws on the side from the side, those on top from the top, and those on bottom from the bottom. CW/IN will ALWAYS be MORE damping.

You could, I suppose, to muddle things, prefer to look at a bottom knob from the top and then look at CCW (from the top) as IN (which would be accurate), but jeez louise, it seems to only confuse people.


New sub topic:

Also, I don't see why anyone goes back to set the static sag. It is ONLY a cross check for proper spring rate. What matters most, by far, is total/laden/rider/race sag.
Measuring the static sag = very very good.
Setting the static sag = unknown.

IF you happen to have the right spring rate, then you'll probably be about right, but, it is less accurate (like using a measuring instrument near the bottom of its range) doesn't take into account front/rear balance, and would only ever be right because-of already having the right spring. It is, charitably, circular reasoning, and more accurately, reasoning with NO reference point. It is not helpful.

You don't have to believe me, and may not want to, so I'll give you a tool you can use to convince yourself in the form of a riddle.

Q: How does setting static sag in ANY way account for YOUR weight, riding position etc etc,
when you're not even on the bike when it is measured? How does it in ANY way tailor the bike to you? In what way does it know what you weigh?

A: I'm not giving you the answer; by now you know it yourself.

The only trick is that you have to look at it from the knob's perspective.
Well...........with me being the knob.................I decided to take my bike to the local Ohlins suspension guy to see what he could do for me.
My original settings weren't too far off, but It's amazing what you can learn about bike handling from a good tech.
I think it was money well spent.
So here is what we ended up with..............
I am 185lbs ready to ride.........
Front
Sag.....24mm
Rebound....10 out

Rear
Sag25mm
Rebound....14 out
Compression..........10 out
Ride height.........Raised 3 turns.

So far, this seems to work well for me as the bike feels like both ends are reacting the same.
It is also turning in better now with the raised back end.

Hope this helps, but do not assume it will work for you.

It may feel good, but that doesn't mean it works well, or is safe.
It's actually a pretty decent setup, except for the front sag, which is low enough that it is easy to top when the front goes light cresting hills or going over the leading edge of dips.
That low of a sag just kills traction when topping too much. Be careful there.

Sorry Rodger, I'll give you the full story. I adjusted the static sag again, because I was alone and wanted a fresh start point when my friend came over in the morning, to measure while I sat on the bike,call it double handling, I'm not on the clock. And to be far to all it is not that simple to know clockwise from anti clockwise unless you know where you are suppose to view the knob from. Take Bob Hancocks comment of looking at the shock from below. So looking at the shock attached to the bike from 90 degrees is my way of explaining how to view the shock. Once you know what your looking at it is then easy to know what way is clockwise. I explained this by saying moving it from right to left. Is that wrong? If so I am sorry to all. All BMW had to do it give a diagram in the hand book and there would be no confusion which way is + or -
Thanks for the feed back.

> I explained this by saying moving it from right to left. Is that wrong?

If I understood your description right (as viewed from the side) then, yes, that is wrong.
You can see where it would be the opposite case of viewing the knob from the bottom and turning it IN.

hth
roger

As explained by the Ohlins guy to me at last years RA, he said just think of the adjustment as a regular right handed thread, and then apply "rightie tightie, leftie loosie". That way it doesn't matter how you address the knob....whether from over head or underneath or the side....it's still all the same. Unless you're in Australia of course. :D

I agree, but, if you go rightie tightie on the bottom (concentric) knob while looking from above, then you're backwards. Clockwise is only clockwise if you're looking at the front of the clock.

Forget about clockwise. It's misleading. Just think of it as a right handed screw and there's only ONE way to tighten a right handed thread, regardless of how you address it. That's how BMW creates confusion by saying clockwise because that descriptor depends on whether you are looking at it from the top, or the bottom.

Seems obvious, but, you'd have to know that the knob is tightening come mechanism UP into the shaft (of a regular rear shock) and not down into the yoke area, for even that to hold true, no?
Not all will get that, so they both seem ambiguous (I've fielded this very question, numerous times, believe it or not).

Roger, for the variety of shocks that you deal with, the rightie tightie business may not apply so more explanation is required. For the Ohlins though....at least the ones I have on my bikes, knowing which way to turn requires no technical expertise at all.....just the little jingle the Ohlins guy gave me.

Well, I don't understand that (and neither, judging by the confused people I meet at the track every week, do most) as right and cw are both ambiguous, as they both depend on perspective, Öhlins or whatever.

This is funny. It's kinda like laying on yer back to take out a drain plug. If you're like me, you gotta think a minute to determine which way this right handed thread goes to back it out. So perspective can cause us to have to stop and think a minute before putting the wrench to it, but it still doesn't change the simplicity of remembering that to increase a damping setting, turn it "in" for a right handed thread in every case. Well....enough of this literary luffberry. We know what we're trying to say. I just hope this discussion helps someone. (And for those who might think I am arguing with Roger...wrong. He has helped me off list to set suspensions before....Mr. Smart the last one I think, and I appreciate it greatly.)

> Well....enough of this literary luffberry. We know what we're trying to say. I just hope this discussion helps someone.

ditto and ditto. And good example on the drain plug. Wish I'd though of it.
If I'm on my back, it's easy. If I'm standing above and reaching under, I have to think a little too.
And btw, I am still talking about motorcycles here.