- Joined
- Oct 15, 2008
- Messages
- 8,936
- Reaction score
- 2,077
- Location
- Out of Africa
- Bike
- KTM 950 Adventure S
So far, just general questions, the numbers are not important. But will appreciate answers relating to off-road and more specifically the 950/990 size bikes.
1. Why are progressive springs for the forks frowned upon, when the rear has PDS or linkage, which both produce a progressive action?
2. When setting rider sag (not static sag for now) a general rule is to allow your suspension to sag about 1/3 of it's travel at the rear. This is fine except I've yet to sit on a bike where the forks also sag 1/3 of their travel. I've also read that that when you sit on a bike it should sag equally. What am I missing?
This also goes for my 450, which doesn't sag at the front as much as the back, yet has the correct (according to Race Tech) spring in and pre-load cannot be reduced.
3. When I load my 950, I'm supposed to compensate for weight and turn the knob. This increases pre-load so the bike stays geometrically level and gives me some travel to play with. So far, so good.
Similarly, with me being a lightweight, I turn the knob the other way (from std) to lower the back for height purposes. What about the front? Can I reduce the pre-load from std as well, to achieve a similar geometric balance?
This brings me back to question 2, doesn't it?
4. Am I too light, at 77kg, for a 950? should I sell and buy a 790? Or admit defeat, buy a BMW and just stay off the dirt? ........................ >
1. Why are progressive springs for the forks frowned upon, when the rear has PDS or linkage, which both produce a progressive action?
2. When setting rider sag (not static sag for now) a general rule is to allow your suspension to sag about 1/3 of it's travel at the rear. This is fine except I've yet to sit on a bike where the forks also sag 1/3 of their travel. I've also read that that when you sit on a bike it should sag equally. What am I missing?
This also goes for my 450, which doesn't sag at the front as much as the back, yet has the correct (according to Race Tech) spring in and pre-load cannot be reduced.
3. When I load my 950, I'm supposed to compensate for weight and turn the knob. This increases pre-load so the bike stays geometrically level and gives me some travel to play with. So far, so good.
Similarly, with me being a lightweight, I turn the knob the other way (from std) to lower the back for height purposes. What about the front? Can I reduce the pre-load from std as well, to achieve a similar geometric balance?
This brings me back to question 2, doesn't it?
4. Am I too light, at 77kg, for a 950? should I sell and buy a 790? Or admit defeat, buy a BMW and just stay off the dirt? ........................ >
