Hi, I was wondering if anybody has done this mod to their 696? And if so how did you do it?
I had a 620 that had the "dog bone" that could be switched out for an adjustable ride height. The mod made the bike higher in the back and therefore allowed more clearance. I'd like to the same thing with my 696, but I don't see the dogbone at all and I'm assuming it doesn't have one. I was wondering if I have to replace the shock with an after market one like the Ohlins for example:
http://www.ohlins.com/Our-products/Motorcycle/Products/Sport/DU-737/ (http://www.ohlins.com/Our-products/Motorcycle/Products/Sport/DU-737/)
Will it be height adjustable?
you can adjust the preload on the spring to raise the rear.
Quote from: Raux on August 02, 2009, 11:56:21 AM
you can adjust the preload on the spring to raise the rear.
That isn't the proper way to adjust ride height.
edit...
What you would be adjusting is sag, which will affect handling in a bad way.
Quote from: ducnymph on August 02, 2009, 11:48:03 AM
Hi, I was wondering if anybody has done this mod to their 696? And if so how did you do it?
I had a 620 that had the "dog bone" that could be switched out for an adjustable ride height. The mod made the bike higher in the back and therefore allowed more clearance. I'd like to the same thing with my 696, but I don't see the dogbone at all and I'm assuming it doesn't have one. I was wondering if I have to replace the shock with an after market one like the Ohlins for example:
http://www.ohlins.com/Our-products/Motorcycle/Products/Sport/DU-737/ (http://www.ohlins.com/Our-products/Motorcycle/Products/Sport/DU-737/)
Will it be height adjustable?
It does not appear that that shock is adjustable for length/ride height.
Contact Öhlins to find out for sure.
Ok, I see what you're saying about sag and preload. I wouldn't want to affect handling for height adjustment. That would kind of defeat the whole purpose.
So what can I do then if the Ohlins isn't ride height adjustable?
The shock is bux and would be nice to invest in for better suspension and for longterm use. But what I am more concerned about is ride height. The shifter scrapes on my left (my dominant side) and the rear brake will eventualy drag if I get more lean on my right. I don't want either to drag and I often hang off to get better clearance. The only things I can think of are rearsets ($800 Rizomas - the only brand I've found that make em for my bike) or adjusting the ride height somehow.
It seems odd that there isn't a ride height adjust bar for the 696. Any other possible solutions?
The 696 uses a different type shock mounting which is similar to the old SS. It's called a cantilever mount. That system doesn't use a ride height adjuster other than shock length.
The older monsters used a linkage type mounting.
Have you checked sag to make sure the spring from the factory is correct for you?
You should have somewhere near 1 1/4 inches. If you have significantly more then you can adjust preload to try to reach that number. That will help clearance issues. Your shop can set sag for you, or you can do it with some help. You should be in your gear.
The other thing to do is hang off the bike more to keep the bike more upright in turns. With sag set correctly you shouldn't have to resort to that to ride on the street.
Quote from: ducpainter on August 02, 2009, 02:21:00 PM
With sag set correctly you shouldn't have to resort to that to ride on the street.
From looking at ducnymph's avatar, I don't think street riding is the issue...
Quote from: Ivan on August 02, 2009, 02:27:42 PM
From looking at ducnymph's avatar, I don't think street riding is the issue...
point taken.... ;D
A good suspension shop should be able to supply a shock which is slightly longer than stock - it would also come with a spring for your weight and riding preferences (maybe a linear).
.
I have the Ohlins DU737 on my 696 and it is not ride height adjustable, it does transform the bikes ride and handling.
.
thanks for correcting my lack of suspension work knowledge. nekkidchic is having the opposite.. well kinda the same problem cause she added a lot of sag? to reduce the ride height, thereby making rear really soft, now she drags the kickstand all the time.
how much does ducnymph weigh would be a good question here. dragging hard parts is pretty hard on the street unless you aren't hanging off at all or you are weighing the bike down... or are just freaking really getting on it.
Quote from: ducpainter on August 02, 2009, 02:21:00 PM
The 696 uses a different type shock mounting which is similar to the old SS. It's called a cantilever mount. That system doesn't use a ride height adjuster other than shock length.
The older monsters used a linkage type mounting.
Have you checked sag to make sure the spring from the factory is correct for you?
You should have somewhere near 1 1/4 inches. If you have significantly more then you can adjust preload to try to reach that number. That will help clearance issues. Your shop can set sag for you, or you can do it with some help. You should be in your gear.
The other thing to do is hang off the bike more to keep the bike more upright in turns. With sag set correctly you shouldn't have to resort to that to ride on the street.
Ok, so this explaination helps a lot. I have some cantilever mount homework to do ;D Also, I will speak with the dealer to see if I can get a longer spring, cost etc. In addition, I do have to get a new shock. Dave Moss, the local suspension guru here in Nor Cali, said I should toss my shock every 10k. I'm prolly just going to replace it with another Sachs and then get a longer spring. I would love to upgrade to the Ohlins but can't. I'm sure you're loving it Spencer, congrats!
I had my suspension adjusted at the track and dragged hard parts there. I definately found pushing the bike up while getting off helped. After that, I dragged the shifter on one especially spirited ride to Skaggs which is the Northern Cali holy grail of moto roads. I found it annoying that the people I was riding with weren't anywhere near dragging anything (RS 1200, Tuono and 954 CBR). The Monster just isn't set up for the lean angle those bikes are, but I still love it though ;)
Quote from: Raux on August 02, 2009, 09:22:07 PM
how much does ducnymph weigh would be a good question here. dragging hard parts is pretty hard on the street unless you aren't hanging off at all or you are weighing the bike down... or are just freaking really getting on it.
I was following NekkedChic's posts about this issue too and wondered how come her stand would hit first. Question answered...I'm 5'7 and 135, taller and heavier. duh. Different setup for sure. Learning is FUN!
With the 696 suspension setup your only option is a longer shock and spring setup correctly for your weight, a stiffer spring on it`s own won`t do it.
The M1100 has the same setup only on a SSS but the front forks are also 10 mm longer to help with ground clearance [thumbsup]
Raising the rear alone will also quicken the steering, not necessarily a bad thing but if you go too far you could have stability issues.
If you go with a new shock, Penske shocks have a length adjustment.
The 696 already feels pretty quick turning in...I might have to consider a steering damper if it got too loose. Another thought I had was would I possibly need to consider getting a taller front tire if I raise my rear more? The reason I ask is because with my current setup I have maybe 2mm of unused rubber on my front tire and 1/4" left and 1/3" right unused on my back tire. I not hell bent on getting rid of chicken strips on my back tire -they stop where things start to drag. (As a result of making these adjustments I may be able to get rid of them some day ;D) What concerns me is that I don't have hardly anything on the front. I was told I could swap out the front from the 120/60 to a 120/70. Given that I'm using the tire all the way to the edge, is this something I should consider? Would the taller tire would also make the bike turn in slower?
I'll have to check out the Penske, Thanks!
Bring it to the next wrench day-there'll be some suspension peeps there. It's on the 8th in the South bay.
Quote from: MrIncredible on August 03, 2009, 04:49:09 PM
Bring it to the next wrench day-there'll be some suspension peeps there. It's on the 8th in the South bay.
During the day?Oh, duh! The Vindigo good bye bash! Yes, I think I might come by for that ;)
Quote from: ducnymph on August 03, 2009, 04:59:57 PM
During the day?
Oh, duh! The Vindigo good bye bash! Yes, I think I might come by for that ;)
Yeah-you can have 8 drunken idiots loosen various things on your bike. It'll make the ride back interesting.
So can anybody chime in on the front tire question from before?
With the current setup and current clearance of my Monster, I'm using most of the front tire, but not all of the rear. Should I consider getting a taller front tire if I raise up the back with a longer shock? With this change, I'll get more lean angle, but I'm just worried with more lean angle I'll run out of front tire... Sorry if this is confusing and ass-backwards. My logic my be all wrong.
Another solution would be rearsets which I wouldn't consider before because the only brand, Rizomas, were ridiculously overpriced. Now woodcraft is supposedly coming out with some in August. We shall see. I feel like that may not entirely solve my problem. To scoot the reasrset back would be better, but any further up would be horribly uncomfortable on my knees. I think a combo of moving the rearsets back and getting a longer shock would be the way to go. Or not? Any thoughts... I think knee pressure is supposed to be relieved when the rearsets are pushed back and up, correct?
Sorry for being obsessive! I'm just trying to understand how the shock, tire, and rearsets could be changed to improve the bike's handling.
As far as the front tire is concerned...
Not sure how the profile compares for the /70 vs the /60.
With it being taller, you do get a bit more ground clearance, and it'll slow down the handling a bit.
Rearsets further back won't really address ground clearance.
Rearsets higher will make your knees less comfortable, but gain ground clearance.
Can you drop the forks in the triples a bit to raise the front?
I'll try thinking out loud, using whatever logic I might have - others may correct me...
Rearsets - back position will lower your knees, which pushes your torso forward. I'm not sure if that is a good thing on the 696, which has a more upright position (closer bars). I guess it depends on how tall you are. It certainly requires working more with your core muscles and squeezing the tank with your thighs.
Lower knees mean flatter angle of the lower leg (body part name?) and the feet will be more at an angle than on stock pegs - the toes will point down a little, which requires you to rest the feet at the ball of the toes, to avoid toe dragging.
Front tire - a 70 will be higher than a 60 and if it's the same brand/model it will probably be rounder, which gives you more lean angle. Given your description of tire use, this sounds like a good idea. It will turn in quicker because of it's roundness, but slower because of the added height. So, raising the rear a little "should" be ok. The added flex of a 70 won't be an issue on motorcycles as it would be on cars, I think.
Suspension - I'm a little undereducated, but I believe you don't outweigh the stock suspension. Maybe a linear spring would suit your riding style/skills better.
If no one makes a ride height adjust for the 696/1100 is does not look like it would be overly difficult to make one. The top shock mount shows in the parts catalog to be bolted to the frame. If one could make a copy of this mount with a little more threads it you could raise the rear by installing spacers.
Quote from: Speeddog on August 05, 2009, 11:39:47 AM
As far as the front tire is concerned...
Not sure how the profile compares for the /70 vs the /60.
With it being taller, you do get a bit more ground clearance, and it'll slow down the handling a bit.
Rearsets further back won't really address ground clearance.
Rearsets higher will make your knees less comfortable, but gain ground clearance.
Can you drop the forks in the triples a bit to raise the front?
I may end up going with a 120/70 tire in the front next time to see how that goes since it will provide some more ground clearance. The turn in feels pretty fast already so I don't think the slower steering would be a bad thing.
I'm not sure about dropping the forks in the triples... I don't think there's a whole lot of room to do that. I will bring it up when I'm in the shop next time. That will bring clearance from the
front of the bike, which I hadn't even thought of aside from the tire.
Quote from: stopintime on August 05, 2009, 11:47:52 AM
I'll try thinking out loud, using whatever logic I might have - others may correct me...
Rearsets - back position will lower your knees, which pushes your torso forward. I'm not sure if that is a good thing on the 696, which has a more upright position (closer bars). I guess it depends on how tall you are. It certainly requires working more with your core muscles and squeezing the tank with your thighs.
Lower knees mean flatter angle of the lower leg (body part name?) and the feet will be more at an angle than on stock pegs - the toes will point down a little, which requires you to rest the feet at the ball of the toes, to avoid toe dragging.
Suspension - I'm a little undereducated, but I believe you don't outweigh the stock suspension. Maybe a linear spring would suit your riding style/skills better.
My concern with rearsets is that I already feel cramped with my stock pegs. It could be that I just have bad knees(very possible). I like the position on a couple of sportbikes I've ridden and find the peg positon comfortable, but then I eventually feel cramped. I just got a long inseam or bad knees. I may have to at least try the Woodcraft to see what they're like because, even on the ball of my foot, I've dragged toes.
Definately going to look into a new spring [thumbsup]
Quote from: caperix on August 05, 2009, 03:28:39 PM
If no one makes a ride height adjust for the 696/1100 is does not look like it would be overly difficult to make one. The top shock mount shows in the parts catalog to be bolted to the frame. If one could make a copy of this mount with a little more threads it you could raise the rear by installing spacers.
That a good point! I think I know of a machine shop that could make that for me ;D
Quote from: caperix on August 05, 2009, 03:28:39 PM
If no one makes a ride height adjust for the 696/1100 is does not look like it would be overly difficult to make one. The top shock mount shows in the parts catalog to be bolted to the frame. If one could make a copy of this mount with a little more threads it you could raise the rear by installing spacers.
That would be correct and the spacer would only need to be about 2 mm thick [thumbsup]
Part number 3 just needs longer bolt
(http://i298.photobucket.com/albums/mm272/jacopansegrouw/MO_696_Eu_2009_ed00_r007_Page_110.jpg?t=1249548624)
it's minor, but that also changes the pivot location of the shock.