My work in progress
05-24-2005 | 07:51 PM
#11
Senior Member
Back Marker
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 201
From: Montreal
Re: My work in progress
I totally agree, this is too cool! What a set of pipe and what a nice front suspension 
Even that I'm totally jalous 
I have soooo many questions, but one at a time ( as maybe you know, i'm in preparation to also mods my front end with a 1000rr one)
So, is the stock top fairing have fit without any cut? As I know the RC front suspension ( as weel as the 929/954 or 1000RR ones) are much wider than the stock VTR?
What a great work again, congratulations!!
Even that I'm totally jalous I have soooo many questions, but one at a time ( as maybe you know, i'm in preparation to also mods my front end with a 1000rr one)
So, is the stock top fairing have fit without any cut? As I know the RC front suspension ( as weel as the 929/954 or 1000RR ones) are much wider than the stock VTR?
What a great work again, congratulations!!
Just kidding!
05-31-2005 | 08:46 PM
#18
Senior Member
Back Marker
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 201
From: Montreal
Re: My work in progress
It's time for another question 8)
On the previous episode of the RC996 mods
, we have learn that in order to fit at 43mm front end suspension on a VTR, we need to perform some cutting of the top fairing.
Now, I ( and maybe also "we" I guess ) would like to see more pictures of this cutting! and also to know if there is some clearance problem with the radiator and/or the oil coolant radiator due to the greater width of the 43mm fork
Thank you so much RC996 you are like a pioneer, you have make the way for those who aspire to a better VTR, AKA SH or FS
On the previous episode of the RC996 mods
, we have learn that in order to fit at 43mm front end suspension on a VTR, we need to perform some cutting of the top fairing.Now, I ( and maybe also "we" I guess ) would like to see more pictures of this cutting! and also to know if there is some clearance problem with the radiator and/or the oil coolant radiator due to the greater width of the 43mm fork
Thank you so much RC996 you are like a pioneer, you have make the way for those who aspire to a better VTR, AKA SH or FS
06-01-2005 | 09:22 AM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
I just put the fairing up and marked where it started to interfere (after the forks were mounted). I freehanded an arc, then tried it and finally got it all to clear. Not a big deal, but several iterations to get it right without going too far. the lower triple clamp causes the biggest clearance issue with the fairing.
Turning radius is slightly impaired by the upper coolant hose. Only an issue when you're rolling it around the garage and making tight turnarounds.
Turning radius is slightly impaired by the upper coolant hose. Only an issue when you're rolling it around the garage and making tight turnarounds.
06-13-2005 | 05:50 PM
#20
Member
Squid
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 55
From: SanDiego,CA
so you used the RC51 triple clamps, upper and lower as well. Just getting an idea. I may have to find a front end in good shape myself if i start playing with the big boys!!!!
07-26-2005 | 09:15 AM
#22
Guest
Posts: n/a
07-27-2005 | 09:11 AM
#24
Guest
Posts: n/a
The head bearings are almost the same. I say that because the VTR bearings work with the RC51 inner races, but the RC51 bearings don't work with the VTR outer races. So there is some incompatibility there. I didn't measure anything to figure out what was different. I ran it with the VTR bearings for a while, then changed to tapered roller bearings. I bought tapered rollers for the RC51 and they are perfect.
Other than that, head tube length is the same. RC51 triple clamp offset is 5mm less than the VTR. I lengthened the shock 5mm, which is about 30mm at the rear axle. This steepens the head angle. Less offset gives more trail. The combination works very well. With stock rear shock length the trail will be excessive with the RC51 triples (probably 929/954 triple clamps as well).
Other than that, head tube length is the same. RC51 triple clamp offset is 5mm less than the VTR. I lengthened the shock 5mm, which is about 30mm at the rear axle. This steepens the head angle. Less offset gives more trail. The combination works very well. With stock rear shock length the trail will be excessive with the RC51 triples (probably 929/954 triple clamps as well).
07-27-2005 | 09:32 AM
#25
Senior Member
SuperSport
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 562
From: NYC
Wow, sounds like you learned a lot doing this project. I'm surprised that the rc51's triple clamps have less offset, and therefore more trail. I guess that the steering head is at a different angle.
Your tenacious work on the project is impressive. That's a lot of adjusting, reconfiguring. Had you heard that the rc's front end would fit, or did you just go for it? In any case, it's cool.
Your tenacious work on the project is impressive. That's a lot of adjusting, reconfiguring. Had you heard that the rc's front end would fit, or did you just go for it? In any case, it's cool.
07-27-2005 | 09:52 AM
#26
Guest
Posts: n/a
Actually, I had people tell me they wouldn't fit. I was parked next to my friend's RC51 and noticed that the tops of the forks were in the same position. We measured them and found them to be the same length.
The RC51 has a steeper head angle than the VTR, which requires less offset for a given amount of trail. Head angle and trail work together to determine steering response and stability. Some people make radical changes to steering geometry by raising the forks, etc. I like to be a little more conservative, trading some steering effort for stability.
The RC51 has a steeper head angle than the VTR, which requires less offset for a given amount of trail. Head angle and trail work together to determine steering response and stability. Some people make radical changes to steering geometry by raising the forks, etc. I like to be a little more conservative, trading some steering effort for stability.
07-27-2005 | 10:58 AM
#27
Senior Member
SuperSport
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 562
From: NYC
Yeah, I understand the trail/rake dynamic, though I haven't played with it the way you have.
Interesting that the tapered bearings for the RC fit while the roller bearings don't. Were you able to measure before purchasing them? It would be a drag to spend the $50 only to find that they wouldn't work.
How much was the RC front end? I assume you were able to get a complete one, with brakes and everything.
Interesting that the tapered bearings for the RC fit while the roller bearings don't. Were you able to measure before purchasing them? It would be a drag to spend the $50 only to find that they wouldn't work.
How much was the RC front end? I assume you were able to get a complete one, with brakes and everything.
07-27-2005 | 12:00 PM
#28
Guest
Posts: n/a
I measured the head tube beforehand to be sure the outer races would fit.
Mostly, I just dug in and tried stuff, with some input from a racer/builder friend (who told me the forks wouldn't work).
I bought the forks/axles on ebay, traded some work for a new RC51 wheel, bought 929 brakes, master cylinder and RC51 rotors on ebay, got the 929 clip-ons free. I thought the clip-ons were temporary to get me running, but I like the riding position, so I've just stayed with them.
I sold my forks with stock springs, front wheel, brakes, Racetech springs and fork brace on ebay. Ended up spending about $250 net for the conversion.
Mostly, I just dug in and tried stuff, with some input from a racer/builder friend (who told me the forks wouldn't work).
I bought the forks/axles on ebay, traded some work for a new RC51 wheel, bought 929 brakes, master cylinder and RC51 rotors on ebay, got the 929 clip-ons free. I thought the clip-ons were temporary to get me running, but I like the riding position, so I've just stayed with them.
I sold my forks with stock springs, front wheel, brakes, Racetech springs and fork brace on ebay. Ended up spending about $250 net for the conversion.
