"L" model forks...

[Ironbutt]

This is kinda an FYI and maybe a question...

I picked up a set of very nice forks yesterday for $25 that are definately suzuki and were labled as simply "GS1000". I knew yesterday that they were "leading axle" type, and now I know they came stock on the "L" model.

I've read here in the archives that the forks are longer and he leading axle was (likely) produced to lengthen wheel base to give the "L" model more of a cruiser look. A quick and dirty tap measurement reveals that the forks ARE about 2" longer, however the top of the fork to axle is about .5" longer, however my guess is that goes away when factoring in the angle and associated trail figure.

Some folks have said it's better to stay away from the "L" model forks because they are too long (disagree with that one) and the leading axle design makes for poor handling (so does fork mounted fairings in West Texas, but that doesn't stop people either :-D ).

So, did I buy $25 worth of excellent condition poo poo or will these work?

On another point, if no one has seen this before, there's a nice guy who builds fork tubes for any make, model or size and in any length you need, tapped and ready to install. Makes the search for which front end off a GSXR or other model moot when considering their original tube length...

http://www.frankmain.qpg.com/

[ruddy]

I don't know how much the leading axle forks would change your steering geometry, but if I were you and needed to replace the forks, I'd give them a try. If you have to use your old springs, you'll likely need longer preload spacers (pvc pipe or stacks of washers work for this). I haven't heard that "L" models handle poorly, but I've never ridden one.

[rkubik]

long forks/leading axles

They are probably fine, remembering that these are older bikes and if one really wants to push performance, it's probably better to buy a newer bike anyway. What kind of riding do you do, i.e. would any theoreticical difference in handling be that noticeable?

The longer forks on the L model (which I also have) was indeed to get the Custom look. But because a longer fork alone (i.e. without raking the neck) would raise the bike too much and make it hard to steer, the axle was mounted ahead of the fork to retain acceptable ride height and steering response.

You may recall seeing older twin shock era motocross bikes where a longer fork was used for a different reason: better suspension compliance. The axle on those was also mounted ahead of the fork, otherwise the thing would be far too tall and hard to turn. Same principle, I believe.

[Ironbutt]

Thank you both for your insight. I'll get around to swapping them out, but I'm thinking there will be no change visually and some change (unsure what) on steering with the added trail. Again, triple to axle is the same as stock...

I am building what I refer to as the streetfighter/cafe/yoshi-bastard bike. I am planning on adding a fork brace, heavier springs, bracing the original swing-arm (like the Yoshi GS1000 racer circa 1978) and moving the shock mounting locations/moving the rear-end up slightly. It's been a fun project so far!

Any other thoughts on the L forks???

[flyingace]

My .02 cents is that the longer wheelbase and lower seat height of the 'L' model acutally improves handling - especially high speed stability, both straight line and cornering. I remember reading an old article comparing standard and 'L' models, and the author came to the same conclusion.

Anyway, I think it's inacurate to conclude the 'L's handle worse than the standards.