Jump to content

  • Follow us:

  • Facebook
  • YouTube
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Instagram
  • RSS Feed
  • Google+




Related Reviews

Yamaha YZ450F 2011


Last review by Le_Racer
* * * * -

Yamaha YZ450F 2008


Last review by thaoe_thumper
* * * * -

Yamaha YZ450F 2015


Last review by JuanPAguilera
* * * * -

Yamaha YZ450F 2004


Last review by 1trackmind
* * * * -

Yamaha YZ450F 2003


Last review by Garrett Canada
* * * * -



Related Garage

2006_Yamaha_YZ_450F50thAnniversary.jpg

Yamaha YZ450F (2006)


Owner: Yzrider1023
Added on November 30, 2016
Photo
- - - - -

16 450F Triple Clamps


  • Please sign in to reply

61 replies to this topic
  • counteru

    TT Member

86 posts
Location: Tennessee

Posted April 11, 2016 - 05:17 AM


I had the bike resprung last week for my weight and set the sag at 106mm. Today when I rode it for the first time, all the cornering issues went away. It made a huge difference. With the stock 5.6 spring, I think the bike was squatting too much when rolling on the throttle exiting corners, which probably was why the front end didn't want to stick and would hop out of ruts. With the 6.3kg spring (I weigh 215 w/out gear) it stopped doing that.

Needless to say, I won't be putting new clamps on the bike anymore as it turns just fine with the suspension set up properly.

 

awesome thanks for that info, I am the exact same weight.



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 11, 2016 - 03:23 PM


Glad to see you got you got your 16 dialed in CSAR . As I just posted in another thread, I've been thinking about going back the other way with my sag. When it was stock suspension I had it at 100mm. Since the revalve I've had it between 102-105...I liked it best at 102. I got to thinking since I now have a spacer in the shock that lowers the rear 7mm maybe I should be going back the other way. On my kids 14 yz250f he liked the sag at around 108-110. The 14 yz250f did not have the 2.5mm spacer. On his 16 yz250f Enzo installed the 2.5mm spacer in the shock and we're at around 104-105 and it's working great. My kid says his 16 turns and handles better than his 14. The reason I bring up the 14-16 comparison is show how with the spacer, at least on the yz250f, less sag is required. I'll be trying less sag next time I take the bike out.

  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 11, 2016 - 07:40 PM


 I got to thinking since I now have a spacer in the shock that lowers the rear 7mm maybe I should be going back the other way.

 

If you lowered the rear of the bike 7mm, you have to raise the forks up 7mm in the clamps just to restore the original steering geometry.  Otherwise, it's like leaving the forks where the belong and running your sag at 112



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 11, 2016 - 08:05 PM


I've wondered about that, and even asked Enzo. They told me flush to maybe 5mm raised, if I remember correctly. It makes sense what your saying Grayracer513. So the spacer is to improve turning, which for the most part it did, then again it could have been the revalve that helped. You got me thinking. I'm going to be experiment with 95-100mm sag and raise the forks up somemore. I'll see if that helps.

Edited by Edge316, April 12, 2016 - 04:53 PM.


  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 13, 2016 - 08:18 PM


If you lowered the rear of the bike 7mm, you have to raise the forks up 7mm in the clamps just to restore the original steering geometry.  Otherwise, it's like leaving the forks where the belong and running your sag at 112

 

Ok, I called Enzo to pick their brains some more. They said with spacer installed to leave the forks flush otherwise it cancels out the reason the spacer was installed, which is to lower the rear of the bike. I thought they had said 0-5mm but I stand corrected! I asked them if the spacer was needed with the 16 yz450 due to it using the 25mm clamp and they said it works great on the 16.I told Enzo I was having a problem with flat corners/sweepers and told them it was working great everywhere else. They suggested trying the 22mm clamp. Now I respect their opinion and have had great luck with them in the past but at this point I'm not convinced the spacer has done much,especially since I feel it improved when I raised the forks 5mm, I'm thinking if any thing it was the revalve itself that helped in ruts and every other corner except flat corners.. I'm also not convinced at this point it needs the 22mm clamp either .At this point, like I previously said, I'm going to play around with the sag and fork height with hope that this corrects it. In the end I might end up with the forks raised 7mm which would cancel out the spacer,but I guess at least the bike will sit a little lower. I might also try a 22mm clamp since I have one. I just hope I get this figured out. I love most everything about this bike but at this point I have no confidence in flat corners.  



  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 14, 2016 - 06:26 AM


Ok, I called Enzo to pick their brains some more. They said with spacer installed to leave the forks flush otherwise it cancels out the reason the spacer was installed, which is to lower the rear of the bike. ..... I love most everything about this bike but at this point I have no confidence in flat corners.  

 

If you lower the rear, and then lower the front, how does the lowering of the front change the fact that the rear was lowered?  What they said, or perhaps how you understood what they said, is a non-sequitur. 

 

Lowering the rear without lowering the front obviously lowers the center of gravity, which is generally good no matter how it happens, but the reason it would be done is to increase the steering head angle, make the forks less vertical and closer to parallel with the ground.  If the bike has a tendency to push the front end, lowering the rear alone is exactly the opposite of what you would want to do.  Not sure what their goal was in that, but they were probably not thinking of flat sweepers when they recommended it.

 

In any case, it's certainly easy enough to experiment with, and I'm pretty sure you'll find that pulling the forks up helps the front hold on corner entry in a flat turn, though it may do so at the expense of some other characteristic.  Rider positioning is also important, though.  You should be well forward on the bike diving into a sweeper, and also try to initiate the turn by means other than trying to make the front wheel turn the entire bike.  "Pitch" the bike into the turn, as the old timers say.  If you aren't running your handlebar clamps in one of the two farthest forward positions, I'd do that too.



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 14, 2016 - 10:44 AM


I fully Understand what Enzo said,theres no confusion at this time. Ive discussed the spacer a few times with them now.I was hesitant about running the spacer due to the fact that lowering the rear would change the geometry opposite of what I felt it needed, which is more weight on the front wheel.I called Enzo again mainly to ask about whether or not it's a good idea to run the spacer with the 25mm clamp. They reiterated once again that the rear of the bike is too high and needs to be lowered. In regards to raising and lowering the forks...I also understand the affects. I've been hesitant about going past 5mm. Now in regards to body position you could be correct, but let me just say I had no problem taking the same corner on two of our other bikes.

Edited by Edge316, April 14, 2016 - 11:07 AM.


  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 14, 2016 - 11:26 AM


If the two other bikes are also '16 YZ450's, that matters.  Otherwise, it's irrelevant. 

 

The effect raising the fork has is not that it adds weight to the front end, it's that it changes the steering head angle.  It has almost no measurable effect on weight distribution at all.  While on that note, people rave about the effects of moving a 70 pound engine forward 3mm.  You weigh how much?  What if you moved forward 2 inches?  Think of that.



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 14, 2016 - 12:33 PM


I agree...forks do affect head angle...but I will say... The front of this bike has a very light feel to it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but by changing the geometry through what ever means ,raising forks ,triple clamp, etc would it or would it not have an affect on how light the steering/ front end would feel on this bike. In regards to the other two bikes...one was a 16 yz250f and the other was a 12 yz250f...so yes neither were a 16yz450f . The 16 yz250f handles very similar to the yz450f accept the front feels more planted, but it also has very loose feel to it. Now the 12 yz250f feels alot more planted and the steering feels alot heavier. Does not have that loose feel to it.

Edited by Edge316, April 14, 2016 - 12:34 PM.


  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 14, 2016 - 02:29 PM


Let me clarify...by changing the geometry it affects the contact patch of the tire which can create a light or heavier feel based on the changes made...am I correct in my thinking?

  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 14, 2016 - 04:35 PM


You're correct to an extent, but there are a number of factors governing steering "feel".  All by itself how light the steering feels doesn't directly relate to how well the front wheel holds.  Changes in actual weight have to be relatively large in order to affect steering feel.



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 14, 2016 - 06:36 PM


Ok Grayracer513 I would agree for the most part that how light the steering feels doesn't necessarily relate to how well the front wheel holds, but on this bike I feel there's a correlation. I look at how the engine is tilted back, how the fuel tank is in the center, and I can't help but think Yamaha has taken the mass centralization thing to far. This bike has a different feel to it than any bike I've ever owed and I've owned quite a few! Will I get this bike working they way I want it? ....I hope so!

Edited by Edge316, April 14, 2016 - 09:53 PM.


  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 15, 2016 - 07:01 AM


Weigh the front, then the rear.  See what the distribution is.  My guess is that it's right at 48/52 somewhere, much like most others. 



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 15, 2016 - 09:04 AM


Weigh the front, then the rear. See what the distribution is. My guess is that it's right at 48/52 somewhere, much like most others.

I might actually try that...I'm curious if it's the same. What's your take on the current generation yz chassis. Do you own one or have you ridden one?

  • grayracer513
42,929 posts
Location: California
Garage View Garage

Posted April 15, 2016 - 09:55 AM


I've ridden a couple of them, a '12 and a '14.  They're certainly a big improvement over the Gen2 models like my '06 in terms of cornering, but they are also a very different beast.  The '12 was very well set up for the rider, who was about my size, and I thought it was really an excellent handling bike.  The '14 was stone stock, and needed some tweaking, but I thought it was potentially at least that good if not better. 

 

The mass centralization does have an effect, and complicates suspension setup.  On the one hand, the suspension has to be robust enough to take the entire weight of the bike dropped on both wheels at once, but also has to be supple enough to take a hit at either end without pitching the bike nose up or down as a result.  The fact that the mass is so well centralized makes smaller forces more able to change the pitch of the bike, as it makes it easier to rotate the whole chassis around the Z axis.  It's extraordinarily sensitive to suspension setup, but from what I've seen, the bike is not in need of any major change in geometry, like links and clamps.

 

It's an MX bike, though, so as far as entry to flat corners go, it has the same problem that they all have to some extent; they push because they have the shallow steering head angles required for stability at speed in rough terrain.  When you look at bikes built for cornering without the need to consider extreme rough ground, bikes like half milers and sport bikes, you see much steeper head angles, often steeper by as much as 5 degrees.  The best way to counter the tendency to push on corner entry is to move up on the bike and perform the corner entry using the front wheel as little as possible.  "Pitching it over" or "pitching it into the turn" is how it's often described.  The goal is to get the rear to steer the bike more than the front.



  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted April 15, 2016 - 08:22 PM




Not sure at this point I agree with you on the geometry. Remember Yamaha put a 22mm on the 14-15 and a 25mm on the 16 yz450f and they're all pretty much the same bike...so which one is right for the bike? Now I do agree with you in regards to the suspension.

In regards to pitching the bike into the turn...I have no problem on my 12 yz250f, my sons 16 yz250f, my sons yz125, or my yz250 2-stroke...only on this bike...with that being said I do appreciate your advise, I feel like I'm pretty far up on the bike but I'll try to move up a little farther on the bike. I'm going to go back to square one. Turn all clickers back to Enzo's recommended settings, lower the forks so they're flush and double check the sag to see if it's at Enzo's recommended setting .

Edited by Edge316, April 15, 2016 - 09:44 PM.


  • Edge316

    TT Silver Member

503 posts
Location: California

Posted May 19, 2016 - 06:25 PM


Ok I finally tried the 22mm triple clamps on my 16 yz450f and it was a huge improvement. I was just hoping to see an improvement on flat corners/ sweepers and it improved the bike on all turning. Gone is the sensation of the front end feeling like it could wash out from under me. I also did not feel any negative changes with the 22mm clamps either. For me the 22mm is a no brainer. I know some guys are fine with the 25mm clamp but in my opinion the 22mm is what Yamaha should have stuck with. I won't be going back to the 25mm...at least not for motocross. I'll have to see how it works out in the desert.

  • CSAR FE

    TT Bronze Member

124 posts
Location: New Mexico
Garage View Garage

Posted May 20, 2016 - 03:38 AM


Thanks for that info. Keep us posted on how she feels in the desert.

  • tomerb

    TT Bronze Member

381 posts
Location: Arizona

Posted May 20, 2016 - 04:45 PM


Ok I finally tried the 22mm triple clamps on my 16 yz450f and it was a huge improvement. I was just hoping to see an improvement on flat corners/ sweepers and it improved the bike on all turning. Gone is the sensation of the front end feeling like it could wash out from under me. I also did not feel any negative changes with the 22mm clamps either. For me the 22mm is a no brainer. I know some guys are fine with the 25mm clamp but in my opinion the 22mm is what Yamaha should have stuck with. I won't be going back to the 25mm...at least not for motocross. I'll have to see how it works out in the desert.

 

We put some 22s on my buddy's 2016 and he can not believe how much better it turns............



  • GHILL28

    TT Addict

3,841 posts
Location: California

Posted May 20, 2016 - 06:49 PM


Remember the 2016 is supposed to have a slightly shorter main frame than the 2014-2015, combined with the increase in offset.





Related Content

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

 
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.

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