Triple clamps for 2010-2013 YZ450F


6 replies to this topic
  • mxbrewski

Posted December 27, 2013 - 01:22 PM

#1

Does anyone have aftermarket triple clamps for this model, and did you notice any difference in rigidity and or steering improvement? I see some of the Answer triple clamps on e-bay at a decent price, but just wonder if they are worth it compared to other aftermarket clamps.



  • DDMX18

Posted January 12, 2014 - 07:08 PM

#2

I ran X-TRIG PDHS triplke clamps with 20mm offset, it was a big improvement over stock. The bike definitely turned inot corners better than with the 22mm stock offset. pricey, but in my opinion woth the $$$.



  • mxbrewski

Posted January 13, 2014 - 01:46 PM

#3

Thanks for the info DDMX18.



Visit the ThumperTalk Store for the lowest prices on motorcycle / ATV parts and accessories - Guaranteed
  • rdefonce

Posted January 15, 2014 - 09:17 AM

#4

I ran X-TRIG PDHS triplke clamps with 20mm offset, it was a big improvement over stock. The bike definitely turned inot corners better than with the 22mm stock offset. pricey, but in my opinion woth the $$$.

Why doesn't Yamaha just change the design on the 450F's to 20mm offset it it works that much better?

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out what the 20mm refers to . . . the parallel offset distance between centerline of fork stem to fork tubes?



  • grayracer513

Posted January 15, 2014 - 09:32 AM

#5

Why doesn't Yamaha just change the design on the 450F's to 20mm offset it it works that much better?

Anyway, I'm trying to figure out what the 20mm refers to . . . the parallel offset distance between centerline of fork stem to fork tubes?

 

Because there is a great deal of disagreement as to whether it works better or not. 

 

The offset numbers you see quoted for triple clamps refer to how far a line drawn between the centers of the two fork tubes is forward of the center of the steering stem.  What it changes is a dimension of steering geometry called "trail".   Trail is measured along the ground from the contact point of the front tire forward to a line drawn down through the steering head center.  This affects the tendency of the front wheel to "center up" at speed (caster effect), and also the tendency to turn in by itself as the bike is leaned, particularly at lower speeds.  Even if the bike feels easier to turn in, the front wheel traction may or may not be improved as a result.  "Pushing", or understeer, is more a function of steering head angle.

 

Decreasing the offset of the clamp moves the fork rearward in relation to the steering head, and so increases trail.  Note that the offset of the front axle in front of the fork tubes as is commonly done reduces trail, and has to be taken into account as the trail is calculated. 

 

frame.gif



  • Envisage

Posted January 20, 2015 - 10:16 PM

#6

Because there is a great deal of disagreement as to whether it works better or not. 

 

The offset numbers you see quoted for triple clamps refer to how far a line drawn between the centers of the two fork tubes is forward of the center of the steering stem.  What it changes is a dimension of steering geometry called "trail".   Trail is measured along the ground from the contact point of the front tire forward to a line drawn down through the steering head center.  This affects the tendency of the front wheel to "center up" at speed (caster effect), and also the tendency to turn in by itself as the bike is leaned, particularly at lower speeds.  Even if the bike feels easier to turn in, the front wheel traction may or may not be improved as a result.  "Pushing", or understeer, is more a function of steering head angle.

 

Decreasing the offset of the clamp moves the fork rearward in relation to the steering head, and so increases trail.  Note that the offset of the front axle in front of the fork tubes as is commonly done reduces trail, and has to be taken into account as the trail is calculated. 

 

frame.gif

Im looking at getting some X trigs as ive also read it makes the initial turn in easier, adds stability & some front end grip (which i find the bike lacks in these areas)

 

Can be a bit to get your head around this. When you say "Decreasing the offset of the clamp moves the fork rearward in relation to the steering head", to save confusion you meaning moves the front axle rearward toward the engine ? ie therefor shortening the overall wheel base length ?  which decreases stability. So going from 22- 20 increases "trial", yet decreases the overall wheel base length. Going to say an 18mm offset, (for the point of discussion) would give you an even greater trail length, yet there can only ever be so much of a tyre thats in contact with the ground ? Trying to understand how the physics of all this give people the improvements in steering/stability.grip they're quoting ?



  • grayracer513

Posted January 21, 2015 - 08:00 AM

#7

First off, yes, reducing clamp (or axle) offset does both increase trail and wheelbase.  But the wheelbase of a YZ450 is 1492mm.  Moving the forks back 2mm closer to the steering head will shorten the wheelbase about 1.6 mm (if you want to split hairs, it will also raise the front end by about 0.3mm).  Given that the rear axle can be moved fore and aft about 40mm for adjustment's sake, how much an effect do you really think the change in wheelbase will feed into the equation?  (not)

 

Secondly, on paper, in a straight line, increasing trail should increase stability.  It will increase the force that attempts to pull the tire back to center behind the steering head, if the wheel is centered in the fork left to right.  But, dirt bikes don't run in a straight line on hard, flat surfaces, so all kinds of other things come into play.  Things that contact the tire to either side of the vertical center of contact (where the contact would be if the bike was straight up on pavement) will tend to turn the front wheel toward that off center contact, and because increased trail creates a longer force arm from contact to steering axis, that tendency to turn is increased.  In that way, it may even reduce stability.  It certainly did on my old '03.

 

As far as making turning easier, yes, it does, but the two interacting reasons for that are quite complicated to visualize.  You can see this perhaps more easily if you have a bicycle on hand.  If you stand the bike up straight and point the wheel forward, the wheel will stay there.  As soon as you lean it slightly one way or other the wheel "falls over" to the side in the direction it is leaned.  That's because you have placed a lateral load on the wheels, and the point where that load bears on the front wheel is behind the steering axis, pushing in the direction opposite the lean, and the weight of the front of the bike is pushing on the wheel through the steering head, which is in front of the contact point.

 

At speeds low enough where the "fall over" effect is not neutralized by the rearward drag on the tire behind the steering axis, the effort required to turn the front wheel into a tight corner will feel noticeably reduced, but it's an open question as to whether the entire chassis will respond and follow, or just push the front end harder, as there are still many other factors at play in the total chassis dynamically.

 

Going back to the bicycle demo, watch what happens at the front wheel point of contact with the ground as you lean it farther.  You'll notice that at first, the wheel turns in quite a ways, but as you lean farther, it begins to be pushed back straighter again.  This is because turning the front wheel in while it is leaned over moves the contact patch forward.   As the contact moves forward, effective trail is being reduced, and if leaned far enough, the contact may even move in front of the steering axis.  Because there is a drag force placed on the front tire by pushing it along the ground that is vectored to the rear, and this force is now being applied to the tire on its side and with reduced trail, the bike may exhibit a tendency to "tuck under", or "cut in" that can have you climbing out of ruts to the inside, or turning the front wheel in farther than desired. 

 

The whole picture can't really be understood well by looking at the individual elements of it.  Single track, lean-to-turn vehicle dynamics are too complicated for that. 







Related Content

Forums
Photo

yz250x vs 450 4t comparisons (preferably desert riding) needed by JakeNorthrupYZ450F


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   Yamaha 2-Stroke
  • 9 replies
Forums
Photo

Is it worth it? (Cam and High compression piston) by macgi77


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Honda   CRF 150/230 F/L
  • Hot  36 replies
Forums
Photo

Snake pit oct 30th by The Anvil


Dirt Bike   Dirt Bike Regional Discussion   California
  • Hot  293 replies
Reviews

Yamaha YZ450F 2017 by Chris.GVS


Yamaha YZ450F 2017
  • - - - - -
  • 0 reviews
Forums
Photo

Megabomb Fitment by 288yz450


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   YZ 400/426/450
  • 1 reply
 
x

Join Our Community!

Even if you don't want to post, registered members get access to tools that make finding & following the good stuff easier.

If you enjoyed reading about "" here in the ThumperTalk archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join ThumperTalk today!

The views and opinions expressed on this page are strictly those of the author, and have not been reviewed or approved by ThumperTalk.