emig offset clamps


28 replies to this topic
  • ncmountainman

Posted August 15, 2005 - 09:05 AM

#1

rode the bike in tight conditions for the first time since install and i gotta say the difference is amazing,i was following the same lines(at speed) as a ktm 200 on tight single track,this just wasn't possible before! the bike actually turns now instead of having to be wrestled around corners :D as far as i can tell it didn't affect high speed stability at all. why they don't come like this is beyond me :D

  • grayracer513

Posted August 15, 2005 - 01:01 PM

#2

I just got a set of '04 48mm forks to put on mine so I could do this mod. I was unaware that Emig made a set for the 46's until the transaction was underway. It would seem they are the only ones that do, although there are at least 3 for the 48's. Once I get the forks ready to go, a set of clamps is next. :D

How has the offset affected the bike's tendency to push or wash the front end?

  • ncmountainman

Posted August 15, 2005 - 02:50 PM

#3

i had to raise the tubes in the clamps 7mm because the offsets raise the front end. and once i got the settings straight( +2 compression and -1 rebound) it sticks like glue,you won't beleive the difference :D

  • RCannon

Posted August 15, 2005 - 03:30 PM

#4

I agree completly...The next YZ I buy is going to be a 2003 or older just so I can run my TAG offset clamps. They make a huge difference .

I have almost a season of riding on them and have yet to notice a drawback..

Well, the front fended does make contact with the clutch cable. It scratches the rear of the front fender.

  • grayracer513

Posted August 15, 2005 - 04:53 PM

#5

It scratches the rear of the front fender.

:D Forget the whole thing, then...


:D

  • yamrider22

Posted August 15, 2005 - 05:45 PM

#6

I just got a set of '04 48mm forks to put on mine so I could do this mod. I was unaware that Emig made a set for the 46's until the transaction was underway. It would seem they are the only ones that do, although there are at least 3 for the 48's. Once I get the forks ready to go, a set of clamps is next. :D

How has the offset affected the bike's tendency to push or wash the front end?


What did you pay for the '04 forks?

  • mikedabike

Posted August 15, 2005 - 08:15 PM

#7

I just picked up a set of 04 forks off a 250F from ebay for 255.00. You can find the 46mm forks all day long but the 48mm are a little more rare.

  • RCannon

Posted August 17, 2005 - 06:48 PM

#8

Mike, are there any mounting issues with these forks....

The idea makes me wonder about picking up a set of 05 forks when folks start parting these out.

Until then, my "Forslyk" valved 03's are going to have to do.


I would love to see more input from people who messed with the offset on the forks!

  • RCannon

Posted August 17, 2005 - 06:49 PM

#9

i had to raise the tubes in the clamps 7mm because the offsets raise the front end. and once i got the settings straight( +2 compression and -1 rebound) it sticks like glue,you won't beleive the difference :D


I hope this does not sound liek an arguemant..I mean nothing of the sort.

Can you PLEASE explain to me how the lesser offset raised the front of the bike?? My brain is having difficulty.

I cannot say I disagree...I felt my handlebars were higher after this mod, but I blamed the higher tag mounts.

  • ripntear

Posted August 17, 2005 - 06:54 PM

#10

I think it may change the rake of the front end to a lesser degree, thus bringing the front tire back toward the bike which would raise the front.....i think.
I'm also considering some new clamps, just can't decide!

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

Posted August 17, 2005 - 08:12 PM

#11

Mike, are there any mounting issues with these forks....



The forks on all the bikes 125-450 are the same just with different springs and valving. I use my bike for mx and supermoto so the extra forks are going to be revavled and resprung for supermoto only. The 05 forks have the cr style brake routing and the forkguards mount differnet so if you were to get a set of 05 forks you would have to change the triple clamps and also the brake routing and fork guards. With the 04 forks only the triple clamp is different for the larger diameter forks.

  • grayracer513

Posted August 17, 2005 - 09:51 PM

#12

Can you PLEASE explain to me how the lesser offset raised the front of the bike?? My brain is having difficulty.

The forks can be thought of as creating a right triangle. The forks are side a. the vertical line drawn from the top to the ground as side c, and the line between those two sides along the ground as side b. You move side a into a position parallel to it original position, but 2.5 mm closer to the right angle at the base (angle A), but do not change the length of the side. That moves the axle postion downward, below ground level, forcing side c to be longer in order to return the axle to a point on side b. To actually calculate it you need to go further, but I'm trying to keep the visual as simple as I can. With the 27.5 degree head angle of the YZF, pushing the forks back 2.5mm would raise the bike .6mm.

  • ncmountainman

Posted August 18, 2005 - 07:35 AM

#13

The forks can be thought of as creating a right triangle. The forks are side a. the vertical line drawn from the top to the ground as side c, and the line between those two sides along the ground as side b. You move side a into a position parallel to it original position, but 2.5 mm closer to the right angle at the base (angle A), but do not change the length of the side. That moves the axle postion downward, below ground level, forcing side c to be longer in order to return the axle to a point on side b. To actually calculate it you need to go further, but I'm trying to keep the visual as simple as I can. With the 27.5 degree head angle of the YZF, pushing the forks back 2.5mm would raise the bike .6mm.

either my seat of the pants dyno must be fine tuned,because it feels like more. but then again,2mm doesn't seem like much either. hey gray while typing this i took 2 peices of paper set them up in this scenario and moved the 27.5' angle(A) 2mm closer(in parallel) to C, keeping a line(on a 90' from line A) as the steering stem/head would be a constant; and the horizontal plane( wheel)moved down roughly the same distance(2mm) ? yep just made another mock-up more accurately and it came out the same :D i should have been more clear also when i stated i moved the forks up 7mm it should have been "up to" as they were already at 5mm,so it all makes sense except for your math. upon doing a larger mock-up on my work bench,are you sure that .6 is not 60%? because thats what i seem to be getting is about a 60% lower axle height,compared to initial movement.

  • grayracer513

Posted August 18, 2005 - 06:11 PM

#14

Look at it this way, as outrageous as the examples are. If you had a head angle of 90 degrees, which would put your fork tubes parallel to the ground, moving the forks back in the clamps 2mm would raise the bike exactly 2mm. If, on the other hand, you had a head angle of zero, making the forks vertical, you could move the forks a foot in either direction and not change the height of the steering head. The angles in between these two extremes will produce numbers in between 2mm and 0. With the head angle being 27.5, it's a lot closer to 0 than 2mm.

An easier way to visualize it might be to draw a line through the axle, perpendicular to the forks, clear to the ground. Create a triangle by using that line as the long side, a vertical to the ground as the short side, and a line along the ground between the other two as the third side. Now move the axle center 2mm down the long side. How much shorter is the vertical side? .6mm

It was probably handlebar position that made it seem higher, as RC suggested.

  • RCannon

Posted August 18, 2005 - 06:21 PM

#15

Thanks you guys. I might cut my cast off just to try this out. I will move them one mm at a time and see how it feels.

I hope this does not sound liek I am complaining about the mod. If feel mor like...."Serious, I can make it better???!!!

  • ncmountainman

Posted August 19, 2005 - 05:23 AM

#16

gray i hate to say it but your wrong,your not sliding the axle down the angle,your moving it along a fixed axis (the steering head). draw two parallel lines(A)upper(B)lower on a 27.5' angle(lets say a half inch apart for ease),now put a dot on(A)somewhere towards the bottom to represent the axle. draw a line through line A and B in the upper half on a 90'angle to A and B(lets call it C)to represent the steering head. now take a straitedge against line A marking line C and the axle point on the straitedge. move it to line B keeping the axis of line C aligned with the mark on the straitedge,transfer the axle mark to line B(and double check by just running another 90 from axle point A to line :D and measure the vertical distance between those axle marks. it will be alot more than the 25% (that .6 is to 2.5),its alot like 60% :D you do realize its moving the whole fork(in parallel ) towards the steering stem right? not just changing the rake,which it sounds like where your coming from. in an arc with a fixed point your correct,but in this case you need to go down to a 15' angle to reach the 25% you stated. and my handlebars are marked so as they can go back where they belong.

  • ncmountainman

Posted August 19, 2005 - 09:25 AM

#17

Thanks you guys. I might cut my cast off just to try this out. I will move them one mm at a time and see how it feels.

I hope this does not sound liek I am complaining about the mod. If feel mor like...."Serious, I can make it better???!!!

go ahead and drop them 2mm more than what it is now and it will restore the balance of the bike,before i did this there was too much weight transfer to the back which i tried to fix with more shock pre-load,that made the assend too stiff and upset everything. once i lowered the clamps and reset my pre-load correctly it was awesome. so yes i think it can be even better :D

  • ncmountainman

Posted August 19, 2005 - 09:41 AM

#18

hey gray pm me your address and i'll mail the diagram to you,i've got no clue how to send it on the computer :D

  • grayracer513

Posted August 19, 2005 - 10:09 AM

#19

gray i hate to say it but your wrong,your not sliding the axle down the angle,your moving it along a fixed axis (the steering head). draw two parallel lines(A)upper(B)lower on a 27.5' angle(lets say a half inch apart for ease),now put a dot on(A)somewhere towards the bottom to represent the axle. draw a line through line A and B in the upper half on a 90'angle to A and B(lets call it C)to represent the steering head. now take a straitedge against line A marking line C and the axle point on the straitedge. move it to line B keeping the axis of line C aligned with the mark on the straitedge,transfer the axle mark to line B(and double check by just running another 90 from axle point A to line :D and measure the vertical distance between those axle marks. it will be alot more than the 25% (that .6 is to 2.5),its alot like 60% :D you do realize its moving the whole fork(in parallel ) towards the steering stem right? not just changing the rake,which it sounds like where your coming from. in an arc with a fixed point your correct,but in this case you need to go down to a 15' angle to reach the 25% you stated. and my handlebars are marked so as they can go back where they belong.

Moving the forks straight back does not alter the rake angle (the angle ahead of vertical at which the forks are mounted). That remains parallel to the head angle. .6 is 24.25% of 2.5, but that has nothing to do with anything we're talking about.

Because the forks move straight back toward the stem, they do so along a line which is 117.5 degrees from vertical (perpendicular to the steering head), or 27.5 degrees to the ground, which is the line through the axle center I mentioned earlier. Moving the forks back 2.5mm moves the axle down this line by that same distance, and the axle's new location on that line is .6mm closer to the ground than it previously was. If you PM your e-mail address to me, I'll send you a diagram of what I'm talking about. If I can get my web site to talk to my computer again, I'll post it there and post a link.

  • biznet1

Posted August 19, 2005 - 10:55 AM

#20

:D :D :D I feel so inadequate again. :eek:





Related Content

Forums
Photo

First Hare scramble tips by dhend8


Dirt Bike   General Dirt Bike Forums   General Dirt Bike Discussion
  • Hot  33 replies
Forums
Photo

Megabomb Fitment by 288yz450


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

100 hrs on 2014 yz450f, shim valves or replace them? by ttr230rider6


Dirt Bike   Make / Model Specific   Yamaha   YZ 400/426/450
  • Hot  79 replies
Forums
Photo

James Stewart back on a YZ450F by YamaLink


Dirt Bike   Special Interest Forums   Pro Racing
  • Hot  47 replies
Forums
Photo

2016 YZ450 by CaptainKnobby


Dirt Bike   Dirt Bike Technical Forums   Suspension
  • Hot  59 replies
 
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.