Landracing Forum Home
December 10, 2017, 10:50:58 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News:
BACK TO LANDRACING.COM HOMEPAGE
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]
 91 
 on: December 05, 2017, 10:44:05 AM 
Started by Koncretekid - Last post by Seldom Seen Slim
How would shocks bottom out on the salt?

Back about ten years ago (when the salt was a tad smoother than today)  we hadn't properly set the compression rebound on the shocks on the ZX12.  It was too slow - so the bumps kept slowly compressing the shocks more and more -- and pretty soon we would get handling issues as the suspension geometry changed/shocks got "shorter".

Don't say it can't happen!! evil

 92 
 on: December 05, 2017, 10:14:48 AM 
Started by manta22 - Last post by manta22
Good grief,.a twin engine Lamborghini.

 93 
 on: December 05, 2017, 08:29:03 AM 
Started by manta22 - Last post by Buickguy3
  Neil, I couldn't resist sending this picture that I just saw on that Face site. Maybe there's hope if they don't like your chassis on the Salt.
   Doug  cheers cheers cheers

 94 
 on: December 05, 2017, 06:27:50 AM 
Started by Koncretekid - Last post by Koncretekid
Tom, if in doubt, using double shocks like a normal bike will take a lot of load off of the swing arm.  Another advantage is the dual shocks act like struts if they are bottomed out and this takes huge loads away from the swing arm.

Bo,
I'm probably not normal and neither is my bike!  And I don't plan on running the Baja 1000, so the possibility of the shocks "bottoming out" is hopefully not going to happen.  Besides that, who wants to read a topic about adding normal twin shocks to a normal swingarm?
Tom

 95 
 on: December 05, 2017, 12:46:27 AM 
Started by fastesthonda_jim - Last post by SPARKY
DAM I had a great post that I lost!!

 96 
 on: December 05, 2017, 12:06:14 AM 
Started by 4-barrel Mike - Last post by dillardP
Two units on my buddy's shop were also included.

 97 
 on: December 04, 2017, 09:20:41 PM 
Started by Koncretekid - Last post by wobblywalrus
Tom, if in doubt, using double shocks like a normal bike will take a lot of load off of the swing arm.  Another advantage is the dual shocks act like struts if they are bottomed out and this takes huge loads away from the swing arm.

 98 
 on: December 04, 2017, 07:58:08 PM 
Started by fastesthonda_jim - Last post by NathanStewart

  Thundersalt ...Did you see those signs and lights?

   jl222

There are bright red flashing LEDs on top of the big giant fluorescent orange end markers that have always been there.  The flashing LEDs have been there for a few events now.  I easily spotted them on all of my 200+ mph runs this season. 

Running off the west end of the lake bed into the pucker bushes is equally as dangerous as running into a net.  A driver/rider would get seriously injured or killed.  Neither are really legitimate options IMO.   

 99 
 on: December 04, 2017, 07:22:43 PM 
Started by Koncretekid - Last post by Koncretekid
Pete,
Thanks for the reminder - - I would have forgotten to drill them.

Ed,
Your point is well taken.  The entire swingarm has to twist in order for that to happen.  But there is only so much that can be done to stiffen up a long swing arm.  The rear axle passes thru holes in the internal solid blocks of 3/4" aluminum which makes what are called "moment" connections.  This ensures that one side cannot twist without twisting the other side (as long as the connections are tight).  If you look at older swing arms, usually round, they terminate in flat plates that have less resistance to twisting than the rectangular tubing with the internal solid pieces, especially if they are not extremely tight.  The only way I know of checking this is to physically grab the rear wheel, top and bottom and try to twist it.  On this design, when I try this even with the front end tied down, the whole bike frame twists simultaneously, so I feel that it is very good.  Luckily, I'm not planning to run any more slalom courses at Bonneville, at least not intentionally!
Tom

 100 
 on: December 04, 2017, 06:44:55 PM 
Started by SteveM - Last post by Stainless1
Re-hijack...
Sum, went 120.872 on 39 RWHP measured on the dyno in Denver... a long time ago....
Here is a quick pic "as run" in 1980 I think.... The young kids... they are older now...
And then back to the question at hand...

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 [10]
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!


Google visited last this page July 03, 2017, 03:55:40 PM