Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 32

Thread: '95 R100R Ohlins problem

  1. #16
    Administrator 20774's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    13,075
    The two pictures side by side. It's clear that the "problem" shock isn't as long and has fewer coils. The coil thickness appears to be nearly the same...the "problem" shock also has quite a bit of spacing between the coils.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    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!

  2. #17
    Benchwrenching PGlaves's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    "Big Bend" TX
    Posts
    8,666
    Look at the two pictures. On the second bike the angle of the two pivot points (shock stud and paralever pivot) is about a 45 degree angle from horizontal. On the original poster's bike the angle is closer to 35 degrees from horizontal. That screams that the paralever arm is too short.
    Paul Glaves - "Big Bend", Texas U.S.A
    "The greatest challenge to any thinker is stating the problem in a way that will allow a solution." - Bertrand Russell
    http://www.bigbend.net/users/glaves

  3. #18
    rabid reader dbrick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Santa Cruz CA
    Posts
    1,755
    The spring in the left picture has far fewer coils than the spring in the right picture. Even if the Paralever arm is too short, I suspect that the the spring and perhaps the shock body itself are not correct for this application, even if the ends do bolt up.
    David Brick
    Santa Cruz CA
    2007 R1200R

  4. #19
    . AntonLargiader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    1,373
    I took some measurements of the Ohlins on my R100GS. The spring is 83mm (which is pretty standard) with 8 coils, and the distance from the center of the mounting stud to the beginning of the spring retainer is 100mm. For reference, the Wilbers R100GS shock on my R100R is 110mm.

    Interestingly enough, I have signs of light contact in the same place. And this is a shock which has been ridden very hard on rough terrain.

    shock1.jpg

    shock2.jpg
    Last edited by AntonLargiader; 02-26-2013 at 06:32 PM.
    Anton Largiader 72724
    largiader.com bmwra.org

  5. #20
    Registered User ricard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10
    Thank you all for the replies and useful info. Anton, the damage to my paralever looked similar to yours when I bought the bike, 6ok miles later it looks like my photos, the entire outer aluminum ridge has been gradually knocked off. I have been communicating with Ohlins USA. The shock Ser. Num BM3321 is correct for the R100R and the spring 1096-24 is perfect for someone of my weight (170 lbs). The length of this shock is not adjustable. After reviewing the photos the Ohlins tech thinks that the shock is hitting under extension, but has no solution to the problem as of yet. I'll keep you posted...

  6. #21
    . AntonLargiader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    1,373
    It's hitting on compression. I pulled the spring off my shock this afternoon and took some pix, but I left the camera at the shop.

    It's hitting at FULL compression, with the external bump stop mashed and possibly some deflection in the rest of the system. With normal weight on the bump stop, there is still space. Will add a photo here tomorrow.
    Anton Largiader 72724
    largiader.com bmwra.org

  7. #22
    Registered User Paladinwest's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    BC South Central Interior
    Posts
    97
    Quote Originally Posted by ricard View Post
    the spring 1096-24 is perfect for someone of my weight (170 lbs).
    It would seem that the possibility exists that it is not perfect
    2008 HP2 Sport 10,000, 2008 R1200GSA 97,000, 1990 R100GSPD 100,000, 1986 K100RS 152,000

  8. #23
    . AntonLargiader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    1,373
    The spring doesn't have much to do with it; suspension is designed to bottom out regardless of the spring.

    Here's a picture at close to full compression. You can see the shock body is pushing on the external bump stop but it's not compressing it much.

    Ideally, the lower body would be a bit longer. Like the Wilbers. But, in full disclosure, my suspension compresses a bit more than normal because some P.O. slotted the upper shock mount . This adds maybe 8mm to the total suspension displacement, which could very easily make the difference between touching and not touching. The above picture does not represent the additional compression allowed by that modification.

    I wonder if there is anything else going on with that R100R that allows more compression than normal. If you remove the spring and take a fully-compressed length measurement I'd be happy to do the same.

    shock3.jpg
    Anton Largiader 72724
    largiader.com bmwra.org

  9. #24
    Administrator 20774's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    13,075
    Anton -

    From your picture, which you said is near full compression, it appears that there is an angle between the driveshaft tube and the final drive housing. Seems like a strange way for the driveline to bend. I was thinking that if you had hit a hard bump or something, the rear drive would kick up, creating a reverse bend with the driveshaft.
    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!

  10. #25
    . AntonLargiader's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    1,373
    Quote Originally Posted by 20774 View Post
    From your picture, which you said is near full compression, it appears that there is an angle between the driveshaft tube and the final drive housing.
    Yes, that is the whole point of the Paralever.
    Anton Largiader 72724
    largiader.com bmwra.org

  11. #26
    Administrator 20774's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    13,075
    Quote Originally Posted by AntonLargiader View Post
    Yes, that is the whole point of the Paralever.
    Right...the "parallelogram" effect!
    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!

  12. #27
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    494
    Any chance the paralever 'stay' bar (I don't know what it's really called - stay that runs from the hub to the frame under the swingarm) is binding?
    61 Gold Star, 76 R90S, 03 CBR600RR, '13 690 Duke, '14 Street Triple R

  13. #28
    Rally Rat
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Central Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    271
    Quote Originally Posted by ccolwell View Post
    Any chance the paralever 'stay' bar (I don't know what it's really called - stay that runs from the hub to the frame under the swingarm) is binding?
    Good one :

    how about the paralever bearings - are they in good shape?

  14. #29
    Registered User ricard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    10
    OK .... Thanks to Anton's photo I was able to explain to Ohlins USA that the shock was hitting under compression. They asked similar questions, to those posted above, about the condition of my paralever. My paralever was removed, the transmission output seal replaced, the drive shaft inspected and the paralever bearings replaced 8k miles ago. Ohlins did not have an answer as to why it is hitting and they have not seen this situation before. They agreed that replacing the bump-stop with a slightly thicker stop would be a good idea. I plan to send the shock to them for this work unless I can think of another solution.

    Regarding the lower linkage arm, the name of which I am unsure, it seems to be working correctly, not too tight or too loose. It looks to be stock. Were these ever available in different lengths to lower the bike?

    Anton, thanks for the help and the offer of measurements, unfortunately I don't have and good way to remove the spring at this time. My mechanic may be able to if it still seems important.

  15. #30
    Administrator 20774's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    13,075
    RealOEM seems to indicate there's only one part number for the rod of the R100R paralever - 33 1 72 310 160.
    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!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •