Bike geometry

[nikeeric86]

Currently have my forks 22mm above the triple on my 2010 250 track bike. Decided to mess with the rear height (stock shock) and ordered dog bones that raise the rear 1.25". Was wondering if any one else had similar numbers before testing it out at the track.

[cbinker]

Stock shock?
What track?
Stock forks?

[nikeeric86]

Stock rear shock, stiffer springs and thicker oil up front. Trying to get out to buttonwillow next week.

[Dave Wolfe]

Just curious what tires u runnin and your wt? Im going the opposite direction, ive got the front end raised up as high as I can and #3 on stock shock preload. Im on Evo S20 tires 110/140 and 230 lbs.

[nikeeric86]

At the moment i have Alpha 13's 110/150 and weight 148lbs with no gear.

[bruce71198]

Originally Posted by nikeeric86

Currently have my forks 22mm above the triple on my 2010 250 track bike. Decided to mess with the rear height (stock shock) and ordered dog bones that raise the rear 1.25". Was wondering if any one else had similar numbers before testing it out at the track.

By raising the rear that high you are drastically altering your swing arm angle which in turn is going to affect how the bike behaves once your in the corner as well as the acceleration out of the corner. It will do wonders for flick-ability with the front set at 22mm. speaking of which, is that measured at the front of the fork tube? If so that's right about where they need to be with proper rear ride height.

[nikeeric86]

22mm measured in the middle where the triple pinches together.

[Kestrel]

Originally Posted by bruce71198

By raising the rear that high you are drastically altering your swing arm angle which in turn is going to affect how the bike behaves once your in the corner as well as the acceleration out of the corner. It will do wonders for flick-ability with the front set at 22mm. speaking of which, is that measured at the front of the fork tube? If so that's right about where they need to be with proper rear ride height.

Hey Bruce, would you mind sharing your setup details?

I've got a pre-gen bike, but have a new-gen swingarm and shock & EX500 17" rear to install once I wear out the current rear tire. Will be swapping a 17" in the front, as well.

From my understanding, EX500 dogbones are about the right length to get a 1-1.25" rise from the rear. Are you saying you'd drop to 22mm in addition to raising the rear the 1.25"?

[bruce71198]

Originally Posted by nikeeric86

22mm measured in the middle where the triple pinches together.

Your in the ball park, its personal preference at this point. What are you hoping to gain by raising the rear?

[bruce71198]

Originally Posted by Kestrel

Hey Bruce, would you mind sharing your setup details?

I've got a pre-gen bike, but have a new-gen swingarm and shock & EX500 17" rear to install once I wear out the current rear tire. Will be swapping a 17" in the front, as well.

From my understanding, EX500 dogbones are about the right length to get a 1-1.25" rise from the rear. Are you saying you'd drop to 22mm in addition to raising the rear the 1.25"?

What details are you after? If you have a shock spring installed that is designed to support your weight and the shock has the proper eye to eye length and your forks are set to your weight set your sag at each end and then fine tune it from there. If you start intermixing parts and taller wheels/tire combinations you can pretty much throw it all out the window. I'm not sure why you guys want the tail way up in the air??

[Kestrel]

Originally Posted by bruce71198

What details are you after? If you have a shock spring installed that is designed to support your weight and the shock has the proper eye to eye length and your forks are set to your weight set your sag at each end and then fine tune it from there. If you start intermixing parts and taller wheels/tire combinations you can pretty much throw it all out the window. I'm not sure why you guys want the tail way up in the air??

From my understanding, the bike geometry isn't perfect as delivered from Kawasaki for more aggressive riding. A lot of manufacturers are understandably more conservative in that respect; I used a slightly longer shock in my old SV650, and it helped handling quite a bit.

What I want is for the bike to handle, and for there to be adequate ground clearance so that I can avoid dragging hard parts. I'm not fixating so much on how they get there so much as the end result. I plan to use it at the track, but not necessarily race... Just track days. I currently ride at an upper B / intermediate pace.

[jrshooter]

my 300 f04 the track is 1 1/4 dbones and 6.8 mm thru at the pinch slice
handles great but i also run a lot of sag on the front.

[bruce71198]

Originally Posted by Kestrel

From my understanding, the bike geometry isn't perfect as delivered from Kawasaki for more aggressive riding. A lot of manufacturers are understandably more conservative in that respect; I used a slightly longer shock in my old SV650, and it helped handling quite a bit.

What I want is for the bike to handle, and for there to be adequate ground clearance so that I can avoid dragging hard parts. I'm not fixating so much on how they get there so much as the end result. I plan to use it at the track, but not necessarily race... Just track days. I currently ride at an upper B / intermediate pace.

Ok, in my opinion, unless you have the completely wrong spring in the back, raising the rear will accomplish vary little. If you have the right spring and you raise the rear 1.25" you are going to a goof up the handling once the bike gets loaded in the corner. I have found that keeping the swing arm angle near stock and using the right springs front and rear, with the proper sag, then adjusting the front end ride height, to compensate for the shortcomings in the front end geometry, has ALWAYS given me/us the best handling Ninja. I think when you start mixing and matching parts, to keep within a budget, sometimes forces you to make compromises with the adjustment of the chassis.