shorter rear shock ??
I am contemplating replacing the shock on my 1985 R80, the ride is pretty harsh .
I am more interested in comfort than corner strafing.
Looked at the works Performance site they list two replacement options, one is 1.5 inches shorter than standard , the price is the same.
I have a 28" inseam and weigh around 170 lbs.
Does anyone have any experience with the shorter shock option ?
Does it have any clearance issues ?
Any adverse effects on handling ?
Once, shorter shocks were the way to go to get /5, /6, /7 to fit the folks that are challenged when reaching down to get their feet on the ground.......Specifically women...............I suppose that this is still valid; but:
It does change the geometry slightly for steering input
It lowers the clearance of the motorcycle therefore you might drag your valve covers more often than you do now
The rather lacking in absorption ability on any kind of bump as is, and removing suspension merely exacerbates this lack of absorption of road irregularities..............
Good luck and God bless.........Dennis
I have only owned two motorcycles in my life that allowed me to put both feet flat on the ground at stops , they were cruiser styles .
It's not that big of a deal for me, but it is comforting to know I can flat foot it when i stop on odd angled roads. That's why i posed the question.
A friend has a 2010 R1200RT that is lowered front and rear , he says it does bottom out or ride a little harsh from lack of suspension travel. I have ridden it and it felt ok to me aside from the excessive knee bend.
I am just exploring options at this point, those bloody shock absorbers are expensive no matter how you go.
Scultping the seat to be less "flat" where your legs go helps to get feet on the ground. Metric tires, which should be stock for '85-on bikes are also somewhat lower. I'd attempt things like that before changing the geometry of the bike. Unless you can find a way to lower the front end too. But as stated, all this brings ground clearance issues into play.
Kurt -- Forum Administrator ---> Resources and Links Thread <---
'78 R100/7 & '69 R69S & '52 R25/2
mine-ineye-deatheah-pielayah-jooa-kalayus. oolah-minane-hay-meeriah-kal-oyus-algay-a-thaykin', buddy!
I can give you a data point. My 83 R100 RT has had Progressive rear shocks shortened 1 inch for 2 decades. The setup info that came for the rear shock never mentioned the front end. I thought about dropping the front end 1 inch but decided to see how it handled. What I noticed is my feet closer to the ground which was good and importantly the bike handled the same. No issue.
Granted, I don't push an RT hard on the street so YMMV.
No clearance issues at all though you may miss the extra inch of travel 2 up loaded hauling a** down a mountain. But with the right shock setup bottoming should be very rare. My Progressives made a dramatic difference-no Connection to the company.
Last edited by wvpc; 02-10-2012 at 10:05 PM.
12 R1200 RT
83 R100 RT
I replaced the seat foam with Sargent's super foam and had them widen the rear section of the riders portion. The old original foam was pretty well dead.
Had them use a plain cover with no fancy stitching so it looks period.
I did not have them lower the front section, I prefer a more flat seat.
I managed to save the original seat cover since it is almost like new and could be reused if needed.
In my own personal experience , shortening rear shocks an inch does not affect handling or for that matter ground clearance much unless you are riding hard.
The works Performance shock say's it is 1.5 inches shorter and i am curious if that extra 1/2 an inch makes a real difference ?
I lowered a Wee Strom i had 2" in the rear and 1" in the front, it performed well in the twisties, but that is a chain driven motorcycle.