I need the stiffest shocks avalibale for a cb360

the easist way to see what is happening is to physically do the geometry changes on a
layout using a stick with a nail for your pivot,some careful measuring,using the same shock length and travel for each example
try different angles and mounting points and watch it all unfold
basically the more wheel travel you have the stronger the spring AND damping you will need
 
mlinder said:
/edit: well shit, you changed wha tyou said, and it wasn't to me anyway... want me to delete this?
Click to expand...

Hell no. We are having a discussion, exchanging ideas and information. It's all good.
 
Rawr! Let's confuse people more!

Here's the deal, add or correct where necessary:

The closer the shick mounting points are to the pivot point of the swingarm, the LESS force it takes to compress the SHOCK.

The CLOSER to a RIGHT ANGLE (that is, 90 degrees) the shock is to the SWINGARM, the MORE it has to COMPRESS in the same amount of swingarm TRAVEL, making it take MORE force.

In conclusion, moving the LOWER mounting points FORWARD decreases the amount of force required to compress the shocks, but increases the ANGLE, INCREASing the amount of force required to swing the swingarm because the shock must be compressed FURTHER to reach the same swingarm angle. WE DO NOT KNOW THE springs STIFFNESS, therefore cannot do the math on which outweighs the other in this case!
Moving the top mount REAR (which cannot be done on this bike) would increase both the force required to compress the shock (less leverage) as well as increasing the angle of the shock, which was covered above as to why it 'stiffens' the back end.

Moving the bottom mount forward will raise the back and of the bike, which will of course give more clearance.

Going with a 16" rear wheel will give another inch or so.

Going with struts, because this is clearly an aesthetic endeavour, is your best bet. Just write "shocks" on the struts, no one will know.
 
This thread makes zero sense. Leaving aside the fact that a rearward sloping seat is silly, the OP wants basically no travel suspension to stop that rear tire from jamming itself between his butt cheeks. He can't use more travel from changing shock angles or moving the shocks forwards or any of the other fine ideas being debated.

He simply needs one of two things. Solid or semi solid shocks so the back end doesn't get any lower or (better idea) to change the rear subframe so it works and is safe. That is no longer an effective motorcycle. It's an accident waiting for the next owner to crash on. Enough said.
 
teazer said:
This thread makes zero sense. Leaving aside the fact that a rearward sloping seat is silly, the OP wants basically no travel suspension to stop that rear tire from jamming itself between his butt cheeks. He can't use more travel from changing shock angles or moving the shocks forwards or any of the other fine ideas being debated.

He simply needs one of two things. Solid or semi solid shocks so the back end doesn't get any lower or (better idea) to change the rear subframe so it works and is safe. That is no longer an effective motorcycle. It's an accident waiting for the next owner to crash on. Enough said.
Click to expand...

Youre not paying attention. I intend to use a combination off all things being discussed. Short suspension travel doesnt make a motorcycle unsafe. The bike I ride every single day has 1/4 of an inch more travel than this honda does right now.
 
teazer said:
This thread makes zero sense. Leaving aside the fact that a rearward sloping seat is silly, the OP wants basically no travel suspension to stop that rear tire from jamming itself between his butt cheeks. He can't use more travel from changing shock angles or moving the shocks forwards or any of the other fine ideas being debated.

He simply needs one of two things. Solid or semi solid shocks so the back end doesn't get any lower or (better idea) to change the rear subframe so it works and is safe. That is no longer an effective motorcycle. It's an accident waiting for the next owner to crash on. Enough said.
Click to expand...

Well, moving the bottom mount forward will, in fact, raise the back end, Teazer. Not much, but some.

And we agree, struts is the only thing that makes sense with that "subframe".
 
So much negativity. If you guys dont like the bike, thats cool. Its not for everyone but I dig it. As far as safety goes. How is what Im doing here even remotely unsafe? I'm increasing distance from the tire to the frame and running a stiffer rear suspension. Again, simple problem, simple solution.
 
Rich Ard said:
Give me a break.
Click to expand...

This is the problem here. Everyone wants to talk about how wrong I am but not explain why they are right. So, how is a bike with a stiff rear suspension unsafe?
 
Rich Ard said:
Give me a break.
Click to expand...

I keep saying to myself, "Let it go. Breathe deep..."

I intentionally avoided making comments on what I thought of the design overall, and kept my posts to the tech discussion at hand, but my initial reaction was along the lines of, "WTF?"
 
It's like a slide on a fault line with a spinning wheel at the bottom
 
Brings to mind a place in the game Tomb Raider, where Lara Croft is in a ventilation duct. One wrong step, and she slides uncontrollably into the spinning blades.
 
AlphaDogChoppers said:
Brings to mind a place in the game Tomb Raider, where Lara Croft is in a ventilation duct. One wrong step, and she slides uncontrollably into the spinning blades.
Click to expand...

Again, there will be a fender...

There is some good info in this thread but it has definitely run its course. So heres the plan. Lower shock mounts are getting moved forward and Im going to run sporty shocks because Im making an assumption they have a higher spring rate than the CB. When its done and the suspension functions properly I will report back. ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DTT Light or Dark

  • DTT Light
    • www.jadusmotorcycleparts.com
    www.lostapostle.ca/
    www.sparckmoto.com

    Spread the Love

    Back
    Top Bottom