Not wishing to step into a minefield, but that swingarm dorsal fin doesn't look to add much in the way of stiffness/rigidity/strength. Did anyone do any analysis of that mod or was it more of a "let's add a chunk of steel and hope for the best" approach or should I say empirical engineering?
And while I'm here, why do you want to lower the bike? Lowering teh center of gravity gets hard parts closer to the road and as an added disadvantage also requires greater lean angle to go around a given corner, so more lean and more stuff close to the ground, isn't usually a good combo for a motorcycle. That could be an optical illusion of course. Many CX's are modified to have what appear to be very high seats, but I have never seen one being ridden to see how high they really are.
Or is it just to compensate for that really high looking seat? If that's the issue, perhaps lower the seat and tank a few inches instead of dropping the whole bike.
Can’t lower the tank much more or I will only be getting 50 odd miles out of it.
Rear arm was sleeved on both sides + dolphinised.
Seen lots of pics & vids of twin > mono shock & no one seems to beef up the arms.
Original swinging arm fabrication was never supposed 2 tolerate the new stresses being asked & as I’m the one on it, 16st & corner a bit hard, l don’t want it folding up underneath me.
You are right tho.
It’s a hit & hope job.
Always been a jammy git tho.
Being a jammy git is OK in my book, but perhaps a different tank might work better to balance the relative size of the rest of the bike. I have one of those tiny tanks for a CB160 and it looks small on the tiny Honda. That may be why people like the old maggot tank - it looks sort of proportionate to the rest of the bike and is quite long - like an old school cafe racer.
BTW, I don't think that many of the other CX's are ridden at all, let alone hard or with a more generously proportioned rider.