Jump to content

Steering damper comparison; pros/cons ?


Recommended Posts

I know Scotts makes a very popular unit. I am wondering how the W.E.R. compares.

I honestly like the idea of the lower location, no special triple clamp, and ease of transfer to another bike that the WER offers, but there must be other considerations?

Like ease of adjustment, durability, effectiveness, value (how big a difference do they make?), etc. What experiences do you guys have?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a WER but just bought a Scotts. I have used the WER on numerous bikes since 1996 and it has worked OK. I am, however, sick of butchering my front # plate. The reason I switched is it just doesn't work on the '03 YZF, as the frame mount is too close to center of the steering head and is just plain designed wrong. OK, so as you turn the bars to the right it damps as it is supposed to, because the damper arm is on the left side as is the frame mount. The damper, because it is mounted forward of the steering head moves to the right as well; away from the frame mount. You get goood damper action. In other words it is a straight pull, 1:1+. If you turn the bars to the left however, the arm is pushed, and as the arm is pushed the damper itself turns to the left and slows the rate at which the arm is pushed. This is hard to describe but it is a basic geometric problem. At one point the arm actually stops moving completely- after about only 1 inch of so of handlebar movement. So what you essentially end up with is a one way damper. Now all I have to do is figure out how to mod a pad to fit over the Scotts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dealer just said i had to order new bars with a higher crossbar.

I used to know off the top of my head exactly how much bar-to-crossbar clearance you needed to run a Scott's damper, backwards. I've forgotten what that # was but I wanna say 42 mm.

I don't know that a Scott's will clear any crossbar if mounted in the forward or "normal" position unless you bend the crossbar, and bending one that is welded to the rest of the bar, like the stock WR bars, doesn't sound like a good idea.

Having said all that, if you are willing to shell out the $$ for a damper you should replace the bars anyway. It is only a matter of time before they get bent.

Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why go with the inferior WER when you can have one of these configurations.

http://www.scottsperformance.com/photos2/396.jpg

http://www.scottsperformance.com/photos2/397.jpg

http://www.scottsperformance.com/photos2/398.jpg

http://www.scottsperformance.com/photos2/399.jpg

Any Config you could want at Scotts...They even do custom configs for Enduro guys...

Bonzai ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I haven't, Sabin. Which is a very good point after reading all this good input (thanks guys!). I can't think of anyone I know who has one either, or I would sure be asking to ride their bike once. It is a very expensive accessory, which is why I wanted to research the options and benefits well.

Nice pics, Yamakaze, thanks!. My concern for my WR is to not block or have to remove my speedometer or high beam indicator or headlight (kinda crowded up there). I currently have TAG 2's in CR Double-Hi bend (no crossbar). They are mounted with low-dollar 1 1/8" adapters on the stock triple clamp.

Incidently, does GPR have a website providing info and pics? I want to be thorough, and this is a new one to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey if you want I can email a photo of my YZ450. I have the Scotts mounted on it with the Renthal Bars with the Scotts bend. It is a very clean looking setup but I think now that I have the Scotts mounted by reversing the arm that the stock bars may work fine. If you would like a photo then send me your email address to cmelkfarm@aol.com and I will send you a photo as I do not know how to list photos here.

Eric

?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Reply with:

×
×
  • Create New...