.png "Powered by vBulletin")
If you've seen another post of mine, I picked up an abused wrecked and repaired/modded old abandoned Rickman CR900 project frame with a few Rickman parts on it still (most of the rearsets and rear brake, steel fuel cell missing the fiberglass tank cover, swingarm, axle, and some engine mounts. Since finding all original Rickman parts would run more than buying a complete Rickman CR, and take me many years to even come close, this frame already modded to fit GS1100E Suzuki engines, fit my checklist for ultimate vintage resto-mod racer type platform to build for riding in the Appalachian hills and mounts in Southeast Ohio and beyond (Eastern Kentucky - Red River Gorge especially, all of West Virginia's endless twisty roads especially the Northeast Monongahela Nat Forest mountains...)
The Rickman frames I have now discovered were built around 715mm long forks, which is incredibly short even in post-classic standards. the rake was already a lazy 28 degrees, so I can't just raise the whole bike up, it will kill my other mission of lower profile 110/80-18 front tire and longer rear shocks to steepen the rake and swingarm angles to more sporting standards.
The RF900R Suzuki forks are the same as the 775mm Bandit 1200 forks (one of the best RSU vintage looking upgrade candidates, best/most tunable dampening) except that they are 727mm tall. I could have more easily gone with some CBR600F4/F4i 755mm tall forks for what I am trying to do, but the brake mounts on the RF900 forks look much more vintage appropriate than the F4i forks, although the F4i forks will give me enough room to mount clipons on top of the triple, as I often go deep into the SE Ohio hills for 5-9 hour rides in some amazing twisties, and I wanted a little higher up riding position with this low front of frame Rickman design, especially with the long stretched solo seat gas tank. The F4i forks have the lower brake mount rearward much futher off the fork lower, which I don't care for too much, but are taller, run the very wide 80mm opposed piston brake cakipers further outboard for more wheel clearance to spokes, and have adjustable rebound dampening, whereas the better half of the RF forks came with rebound and preload adjustment, no compression (less critical anways).
I got a killer deal on some RF forks, and liked the appearance a slight bit better, but this creates some triple fitment issues I need to address here. See next post. (CBR900RR 6 bolt rotors with spacers and holes enlarged will bolt to my GS hubs, Hayabusa/Bandit brakes fit the RF900R forks)
Here's a mockup of the ride height (suspended frame by ratchet straps) with the swingarm angle topped out at almost 13 degrees (Dave Moss recommends no higher than 13.5 degrees topped out), shorter front tire and RF forks clamped at a height to simulate my front ride height and front tire radius. 25.6 degrees rake from 28 degrees is a pretty excellent result, using a 50mm offset triple will yeild 3.73" trail, 49mm offset will yeild 3.78" trail - a safer more stable bet in case my calculations have much margin of error. Front sprocket size likely needs increased 1+ tooth to give the chain better clearance to the swingarm pivot tube going with 50mm longer rear shocks.
The Rickman frames I have now discovered were built around 715mm long forks, which is incredibly short even in post-classic standards. the rake was already a lazy 28 degrees, so I can't just raise the whole bike up, it will kill my other mission of lower profile 110/80-18 front tire and longer rear shocks to steepen the rake and swingarm angles to more sporting standards.
The RF900R Suzuki forks are the same as the 775mm Bandit 1200 forks (one of the best RSU vintage looking upgrade candidates, best/most tunable dampening) except that they are 727mm tall. I could have more easily gone with some CBR600F4/F4i 755mm tall forks for what I am trying to do, but the brake mounts on the RF900 forks look much more vintage appropriate than the F4i forks, although the F4i forks will give me enough room to mount clipons on top of the triple, as I often go deep into the SE Ohio hills for 5-9 hour rides in some amazing twisties, and I wanted a little higher up riding position with this low front of frame Rickman design, especially with the long stretched solo seat gas tank. The F4i forks have the lower brake mount rearward much futher off the fork lower, which I don't care for too much, but are taller, run the very wide 80mm opposed piston brake cakipers further outboard for more wheel clearance to spokes, and have adjustable rebound dampening, whereas the better half of the RF forks came with rebound and preload adjustment, no compression (less critical anways).
I got a killer deal on some RF forks, and liked the appearance a slight bit better, but this creates some triple fitment issues I need to address here. See next post. (CBR900RR 6 bolt rotors with spacers and holes enlarged will bolt to my GS hubs, Hayabusa/Bandit brakes fit the RF900R forks)
Here's a mockup of the ride height (suspended frame by ratchet straps) with the swingarm angle topped out at almost 13 degrees (Dave Moss recommends no higher than 13.5 degrees topped out), shorter front tire and RF forks clamped at a height to simulate my front ride height and front tire radius. 25.6 degrees rake from 28 degrees is a pretty excellent result, using a 50mm offset triple will yeild 3.73" trail, 49mm offset will yeild 3.78" trail - a safer more stable bet in case my calculations have much margin of error. Front sprocket size likely needs increased 1+ tooth to give the chain better clearance to the swingarm pivot tube going with 50mm longer rear shocks.
Comment