GaryZ

I am thinking the same thing . . .

My 17mm hex socket is a 17mm bolt with the nut welded on . . . Works great!

It seems to me something is wrong. I have been changing my own tires for a number of years and my habit is to leave the weights on the wheel and check the balance of the assembly before breakdown, it is usually close to balanced. Check the balance again after the old tire is removed, again it usually is balanced. I mount the new tire (when available I put the dot at the air valve) and usually the new assembly is still balanced. My

I recently installed Progressive fork springs in my '92 and had the opposite results. My '92 has 30,000 original miles. The Progressives raised the ride height and are much stiffer. I did not use the spacer that came with the springs, I reused the aluminum spacer (item 29 below). I used 10wt fork oil. Do you weigh more than 250lbs?

If each fork has 12.7 oz for a total of 25.4 oz, what is left of the 33.8 would be about what I have left in my bottle. Darn, I hate it when you are right . . .

I'm no expert either. I do not think air is compressed in a fork so much as the oil has someplace to go after being forced through the damping restriction. Too much oil and the travel is limited (This is probably my problem at this time). The oil viscosity affects how fast the oil can be forced through the restriction and that is why 10wt oil offers more damping action versus 7.5wt oil. (BTW: I have read an article that suggests that the wt number on fork oil is a wild ass guess) It is also said that reducing the amount of oil versus the recommended amount will reduce damping. More damping equals stiffer.

The more oil poured into the fork, the higher up that oil goes. So, you are correct. I put more oil in rather than less. This could be why the forks seem too stiff . . . I might be oil binding the forks. Thanks for getting me straight! I purchased a 1 liter bottle of fork oil and used about 66% of the bottle for both forks.

I am not saying the other member is wrong. However, I slightly under filled my '92 forks and used more than 360mL (12oz) per fork. If the other member is a heavy rider, and you are a lightweight, you might be needing more oil to accomplish the correct damping. BTW: I am a heavyweight

I would define pogo as the front end bouncing like a pogo stick and the rear suspension working normal. I would define porpoise as rocking like a child's rocking horse where the front goes up and the rear goes down, then the front goes down and the rear goes up. The question is to try and see if the rear suspension could be the problem . . .

I used Maxima Racing Oil (see pic below). My '85 is running 7.5wt oil and Progressives and I ran my E3 rear tire all the way to the tread edge with a passenger in NW Arkansas. The stock rear shock was running 55psi and the front was Progressive springs, 7.5wt fork oil, added 6psi of air for more ground clearance. The '85 went on a diet as soon as I got it (removed floor boards, CASS system, CB radio, front fender bumper, trailer hitch/rear bumper, and bobbed the rear fender. I really, really like the way the '85 handles. The '92 is probably carrying 60+ pounds more weight. Neither bike exhibits low speed pogo. Could you be porpoising (rocking like a hobby horse)? How much air are you running in the rear shock? Riding double? Lots of stuff in saddle bags and trunk? Bike loaded with bling? Could you have too much oil? Have you measured the oil level with the forks collapsed? Progressive suggests no more than 5.5" below the top.

I always want a soft, responsive and controlled suspension. My sport bikes have adjustable rebound damping (newer sport bikes have adjustable rebound and compression). My habit is to set the springs soft and adjust damping to my liking. My recent changes have resulted in a bit too much damping. In a perfect world I would have used something lighter than 10wt fork oil. Unfortunately my local shop only had 10wt. That is why I reduced the level from 5.5" (suggested by Progressive) to 5.25" of oil. Removing more oil will be less damping. A total lack of damping would pogo, think of a car with bad shocks. However, it seems to me that since your bike is smooth at speed, the pogo could be a brake binding or front wheel out of round, sticking bearings. I would start troubleshooting by raising the front wheel off the ground and spinning it. It is normal for brake pads to drag slightly.

OK, here's an update: Replaced the fork seals and installed Progressive springs. For re-assembly I eliminated the stock spacer (metal tube) and reused the washer on top of the spring, and I reused the stock aluminum spacer instead of the PVC spacer in the Progressive kit. I also poured in 10wt fork oil until it was 5.25" from the top with the forks fully compressed. This combination required approximately 3/4"- 1" compression of the springs to install fork caps. I found that a speed handle and socket worked wonders for installing the fork caps! We rode nearly 300 miles for a test of the set-up. No leaks! The ride is firmer than before and I might remove more fork oil to reduce damping. Ground clearance is slightly better, but, with 70lbs of air in the rear shock it still wants to drag on certain driveways (slightly leaned over, riding double). I am still puzzled that the '92 seems to have much less ground clearance vs the '85 . . .

I used two lines on another project and I plan on changing my '85 sooner or later. My rear brakes are connected to the original port on the master because it was already there. I'm confused as to why you say it was easier to use the front port . . . Part of the reason for my post was to mention that I successfully used the original front master, even though others claimed it would not work. Here is a 17mm front master that I used on a Can Am Spyder project; $51

I am not sure what is causing your issues. I can tell my story; I de-linked my '85 by connecting the stock front master to a Kawasaki splitter and two new braided lines to the front calibers. The hose from the master to the splitter is one of the original rubber hoses and it is too long. I disabled my anti-dives by removing the hoses and capping the ports. My front master has an adjustment for stroke and I adjusted to max (under the brake handle). No joy trying to bleed the beast until someone suggested the tying handle trick. Bleeding took two nights of pumping the system and tying the handle, then bleeding at the master's banjo bolt. My front brakes now work ok. However, my back brakes hardly work at all after gutting the proportioning valve! How did you get yours good enough to lock up the rear wheel?

The MK2 is heavier and could make a difference in the 2nd gear performance

Let us know if, or when, you find the WOT miss. My '92 is driving me nuts with the same prob. I find it strange that I have never needed any special brake bleeder for a motorcycle. I have always used a short piece of fuel line and a glass bottle or jar . . .

Welcome to the forum. As with most "special tool" questions, some owners recommend them and others find another way. I did not use a "special tool". I wanted to mention that the head bearings are standard sized and can be purchased by size from a bearing supplier. My '85 started exhibiting a "detent" or notch when the front tire was straight. This notch made it difficult to hold a straight track on the road. This is a typical symptom of a heavy bike with lots of miles on it, or a lighter bike that has been doing wheelies. I took the bearings out with a hammer hitting a pry bar, striking in the small slots around the bearing perimeter, and they popped right out. Measure how thick they are, the ID (inside diameter) and OD outside diameter. Order replacement captured roller bearings with the measured dimensions. They can be found on-line as little as a couple of bucks. I tapped the new ones in place with a cut down 2x4. Re-assemble the steering head and set the torque. I used the method of bouncing off the steering stop. With the front end completely assembled and the front wheel off the ground, lightly push the bars far left or right and they should bounce off the steering stop a couple of inches. No bounce means too tight, more than a couple of inches means too loose.

I replaced the fork springs with Progressives on two ZX11 Ninjas and my '85 VR. Progressive suggested this method for getting the right amount of oil; With springs and hardware out of fork, drain all oil out of each fork Collapse the fork all the way Add oil of choice until it is no less than 5.5" from the top of the fork Less oil (more than 5.5") will reduce damping extend fork and install spring and hardware Repeat on other fork I used a small carpenter's square to measure the level.

All good VR clutch advice! I suspect old fluid causing clutch creep and old springs causing slippage. The clutch started slipping at upper rpm under hard throttle on my '85 after the cam upgrade. The '87 engine was only a little over 40,000 miles old and the clutch still looked good. I ended up replacing the clutch and using two stock clutch springs, stacked. I can't remember who suggested it, but, it worked. And the clutch handle pull is reasonable. Edit: I guess I didn't realize the '84 uses the six coil springs, not the flexing piece of metal on my '87 engine . . . Sorry

I had problems bleeding my '85s front brakes. Someone here suggested that I pump them up and bungie cord the handle overnight. then bleed again. IT WORKED Maybe you can do the same on your rear brakes? BTW: Have your brakes been de-linked?

Thanks everyone for the ideas and thoughts. I am not believing that the springs are simply "old" as I have been around lots of old bikes and cars. It is very real, after owning two VR's, that the stock fork springs are not very good. The best comment for me seems to be that the seals are old and dried out. Especially since the bike has been sitting in a car port for the past 18 months. I ordered and recieved seals and now need to make room in the shop to replace them . . . and I ordered the springs just now. Maybe the thing will quit dragging the center-stand!

Thanks for the ideas . . . I will probably try cleaning the seals. In my experience, it is uncommon for both fork seals to start leaking at the same time if rough roads and wheelies have been avoided. I usually use a strip on a feeler gauge to clean the seals . . . There is a total of 32,000 original miles on my '92. It is unlikely the springs are wore out. I run the maximum air because if I don't, it has very little ground clearance. The issue of this bike dragging the center-stand has been cussed and discussed since I bought the beast. No suggestions seem to help the ground clearance compared to my '85 VR. The '85 has Progressive fork springs and I will run 6lbs of air when carving corners with a passenger. I have posted a picture of the rear tire on my '85 after some aggressive twisty roads and the edge of the tread is feathered. Most of the time there isn't air in the '85s forks. Yes, it normally will lose about 4lbs of air from the forks when parked for awhile. This was 10lbs . . .

My '92 only sat for a couple of months this winter. I noticed the forks air was down from 16 to 6 and pumped it back up. Note: I have a problem dragging the center stand when carrying my best friend, so I run 16lbs of air in the forks and 71lbs in the rear most of the time. I have been doing this for around 5k miles. When I fired her up and rode to the car wash, the forks went limp. The fork seals are blowing oil all over and air leaked out! The only thing different this year is I had removed the 'gator dust covers a couple of rides before parking her for the cold weather. There are no dust covers at all protecting the seals right now . . . OK experts (and all others): Did grit get into the seals, or should I bleed air out of the forks when she sits for awhile?

I have Dunlop Elite 2 tires (E2) on my '92 VR and I hate them. They squirm! My '85 has Elite 3 (E3) tires and I really like them. The Elites are not particularly cheap, but, they last a long time. I have Shinko tires on one of my Ninjas and I'm liking them. The Shinkos need slightly more warm-up and I will likely try them on the '92 soon.