Version 4 R1 Shock Adapter Release

S

Satan666

Well-Known Member
Visit site
I am ready to release the latest version R1 shock adapter for the GEN II.

This adapter uses the '04-06' (spring rate for riders <180#) or '07-'08 (riders <210#) R1 shock without any modifications to the FZ1.

It does result in a mild 22mm (3/4-7/8") rise in ride height depending on rider weight within the spring range. Riders over 210# may need a heavier spring.

See: Satan's New R1 Shock adapter - FZ1OA Message Board for technical review.

I am taking deposits for the 1st run due for delivery late December.

PM for payment info.
 
Production Run #1 Received

For those that might have interest, I have a few adapters left from the 1st run. So far, here is the pertinent info:

The new version adapter fits the '04-'08 R1 Shock with the reservoir facing to the rear. In doing so, 3 elements change from the earlier version adapter. First, the need to use the clevis is eliminated. Also eliminated is the need to mod the EXUP motor position.

Second, the angle of the shock in relation to the linkage changes by about 7%. This effectively reduces the R1 spring rate in comparison to the earlier adapter. The '04-'06 spring works good for riders up to 190# and the '07-'08 to 220#. If you are at the top of the ramp for preload or if the R1 spring feels too soft, you may need a slightly stronger (R1) spring.

Third, because of engineering constraints, the R1 shock is positioned about 11mm downwards from the otherwise 'stock' height with the FZ1 shock.

This may raise the rear of the bike up to 22mm-3/4" (2x ratio) more or less depending on the preload adjustment. It may be a wash considering the rider's weight, the higher rate of the FZ1 spring and the ride height at stock preload.

Raising the rear slightly increases turn-in and gives less inhibition to handlebar oscillation at very high speeds without a steering damper. My personal opinion is the FZ1 benefits from the increased turn-in.

The steering angle change can be lessened by raising the front of the bike slightly (5-10mm) by lowering the fork tubes in the triples. This however raises the bike in relation to the rider's seat. Short-legged riders be advised.

The height difference can also be compensated for by decreasing spring preload. This would only work if the overall shock/spring travel would not start to exceed maximum over rough pavement or high-speed turns. In that case, a stronger R1 spring is required.
 
Hi, how much are these adapters posted to uk? Could you lose the extra 20mm or so with a lowering link, or would this mess up spring rates etc.? What profile rear tyre is that extra height with? Sorry to ask so many questions, Cheers Curt.
 
curt46 said:
Hi, how much are these adapters posted to uk? Could you lose the extra 20mm or so with a lowering link, or would this mess up spring rates etc.? What profile rear tyre is that extra height with? Sorry to ask so many questions, Cheers Curt.
Click to expand...

This is an informative thread for discussion, in Mods rather than Classifieds. PM for pricing. Here is your requested information.

Use of a longer dogbone is problematic. There is only about 3mm of clearance at full shock extension between the bottom eye of the shock and the stock dogbone. Lengthening the dogbone to lower the bike would cause the shock to strike the dogbone. Not good.

It would be possible to fabricate a longer dogbone with an offset for the shock eye. It is also possible to fabricate new linkage plates to achieve the same end. At that point the economic value of the adapter and R1 shock is no longer valid. You might just as well buy an adjustable Ohlins.

The length of the dogbone does not affect spring rate. Absent a progressive rate spring, the rate remains constant over the full compression travel. When you encounter a bump or increase loading force in a turn, the spring compresses to offset the weight. Ideally, the spring would not bottom under the most severe compression force encountered during the predicted riding tour.

The rear spring rate is engineered to provide this support given a predicted rider weight. Both the FZ1 and R1 use a 2-1 linkage ratio with almost the same swingarm pivot to axle length. Why are the R1 springs 20-25% less strong than the FZ1? Predictably, the engineers factored in the likelihood that the FZ1 would more often bear a passenger than the R1 (or, politely, the FZ1 rider will be a bit more 'robust'). That makes for a bit more butt-bumping ride as the FZ1 encounters road irregularities with only one person on board. Use of the R1 spring provides significant relief in that department (provided the rider is less than 240#). It also is a more sophisticated shock absorber making for a better 'grip' feel. Since the travel length of the FZ1 and R1 shocks are the same, nothing is lost in suspension movement.

Dogbone length does affect the amount of preload (spring compression) to achieve any particular ride height. Proper preload set equates to about the first 15-20% of spring travel. On the FZ1, the Owners Manual references spring ramp settings as affecting the ride from 'soft' to 'hard'. Can you 'fudge' preload to vary ride height? Certainly! Is the +20mm adapter design difference a big problem, No! In fact, it works in the favor of riders in the 180#+ range.

The size of the tire is not relevant to the potential change in height from installing the adapter. The difference in tire aspect ratios and effective heights is insignificant. 190/50 vs 55 is less than 10mm. In theory, use of the adapter with equivalent preload settings on the lighter sprung R1 shocks should offset much of the design height difference. As discussed, preload may be used to offset the difference.

I had reports from users of the earlier adapters that the rear was actually lower. I recommend first properly setting preload on the stock shock and taking measurements. Then, install the adapter and R1 shock, repeat the preload set and measurements and compare the differences.

However, this level of attention to detail is rarely achieved. In most cases, the stock shock is off when the adapter arrives in the mail and the bike is rolling down the driveway seconds after the dogbone bolt is tightened.

Larger profile rear tires (190/55 vs 190/50) do effectively raise the rear a few mm, change the steering head angle and rake as well as provide a small but effective change in turning radius vs lean angle. Most riders have commented on the improved turn-in. Combine the adapter with a 190/55 and you may notice a significant change. I personally swapped an R6 rear wheel with a 180/55 and was satisfied with the handling results combined with a lower seat height. I was however scraping my boot toes on the twisties.

In conclusion, there are many factors that determine the handling characteristics of any particular bike. Changing one thing may have a significant affect on others. I note that the ride height change from installing the adapter with the R1 shock may raise the rear and cause a change in handling. It does not make the bike un-ridable. It makes it different and that is the goal.
 
Tried to PM but got this back.


1. Satan666 has chosen not to receive private messages or may not be allowed to receive private messages. Therefore you may not send your message to him/her.

If you are trying to send this message to multiple recipients, remove Satan666 from the recipient list and send the message again.
 
Satan666 said:
I am ready to release the latest version R1 shock adapter for the GEN II.

This adapter uses the '04-06' (spring rate for riders <180#) or '07-'08 (riders <210#) R1 shock without any modifications to the FZ1.

It does result in a mild 22mm (3/4-7/8") rise in ride height depending on rider weight within the spring range. Riders over 210# may need a heavier spring.

See: Satan's New R1 Shock adapter - FZ1OA Message Board for technical review.

I am taking deposits for the 1st run due for delivery late December.

PM for payment info.
Click to expand...

Hi..do you still sell the item? Im intrested to get 1.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top