Great White

Just recently bought an HJC IS-Max II. Happy with it while I could ride. Only got a bout a week with it before my back took me out of the rest of the season....

I've gotten some mobility back and thought I would frig around with the bike in the garage since I can't ride it. I've been toying with doing a wheel swap and putting radials on the Venture. First. let me say the guy who designed the rear end of these bikes should be shot with a ball of his own poo. I've never seen a rear tire so hard to get to or so hard to change. That being said, after I got the stocker out of the way I slipped in a ZX7R 17 x 5.50 rim I've got waiting for a radial tire swap on my FJ1200. It's wearing a 170 tire. Let's just do some pics now: http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/justonepict/FECC609B-A9F1-4A08-B067-A7F4CC0A6195_zpso3bntkkf.jpg http://i1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/justonepict/6401A1B2-F6AA-4E64-BD90-10FADD500549_zpssq64ohuv.jpg Here's it rolling and showing it clears. Not by much, but it clears: http://vid1174.photobucket.com/albums/r618/justonepict/E0D0C6D4-C4D4-4E49-AF07-1AFFBA48E666_zpsc19pti8b.mp4 Now obviously, that's a chain drive wheel so there's no connection with the differential. I just centered the tire in the opening. The differential is removed for these pics. If I were to use a similar wheel, it woudl have to be chucked up in one large lathe and have the LH side of the hub turned waaaay down just to fit the diff and have some kind of hub drive. But there was also no way in heck that 170 would have fit in the swingarm if the diff was installed either. Just not enough clearance. It's sure fn to think about it, but one heck of a lot of work. Do-able but one monster job to get it done.....

I was answering "phonetrouble", but it's all still good info.

"F" that Pandora biotch I say! Crack that box wide open so I know what I'm dealing with right friggin' now! I'm the type that would rather know so I can face it head on rather than being lead around only to be told the same thing at the end of the trail. I want the KNOW so I can formulate my own plan for my own life. Yeah, I'm the "just rip the damned band aid off" type guy. If it all falls apart, at least you know what you're dealing with. If you don't even know what you're dealing with, how can you ever figure out what to do about it?

Anyone else think it's funny that the lithium battery label says "lithiumion" and they go on about how it's a "lithium iron phospate" battery?

Still waiting for the results of the CT scan, but the doctor told the girl who makes the appointments to tell me there's nothing seriously wrong. No more info than that for now. I am walking now, and I don't need the walker. Still can't bend at the middle or pick things up off the floor though and I always have a cane with me. More so to just transfer my weight on to it if my back starts protesting than to actual use while walking. Still can't sit in anything but a recliner for more than a few minutes at a time. But it's progress. I'll take it. However, the doc and I are going to have a rather frank convo about WTH is going on. It started in 2002 and flares up every 1.5-2 years. This is the worst it's been since I first injured it. It's time to stop pussy footing around and figure out WTH is wrong. I refuse to live my life wondering when or what is going to put me on the floor without at least know WHY it's happening. If they can't do anything about it that's one thing, but they can at least figure out why it's happening.....

I would say it's too wide. Not because of the added 10mm of section width, but because of the rim width recommendations. If you go to the Michelin 2015 tire fitment guide they list the 130/90 18 and it's a bias ply, so that seems to work (maybe need a little fender massaging at most). But Michelin "conveniently" left out the rim width data in the 2015 guide. Probably for liability issues as much as anything else. Legally, they only want people putting OEM recommended tires on OEM rims. If you go to the last guide where they still gave the rim widths, they didn't offer the commander II in 130/90 18. But if you look at the chart, they do/did offer a 130/90 17 in bias ply. The important numbers here are the section width and aspect ratios, since they they determine rim width needs. If it was an 18 instead of a 17, they rim width needs would be the same. The rim width for that 130/90 17 is listed 3.00. Almost into radial tire rim width territory (most front radials start at 3.5 rim widths) The Venture uses a 2.15 front rim. The 2.15 is pretty narrow for the Michelin commander II front tire with the above info taken into consideration. What it means to you is you could have some odd handling behaviors. Typically, a tire mounted on too narrow a rim ends up with a very rounded cross section due to the sidewalls being pulled in farther than the OEM intended. Some things you can get are a "squirming" feeling under load, slow handling or a bike that seems to "tip in" when leaning (ie: hard to get into a lean and then a quick roll in once it starts). You can even end up width excessive heat in the carcass (due to the sidewalls not running in the plane they were intended for) which can cause tire failure. The heat is caused by the cord plys/carcass in the tire deflecting while in use. We're not talking about bumps, highway running is the worst for heat build up as the flexing happens as the tire rotates down to the road surface and sort of "squishes out" (or flattens if you prefer) at the contact point. All tires do it, the contact surface is flatter than the rest of the tire, but OEM's design for that. But too wide a tire on too narrow a rim deflects the carcass more than the OEM designed for and it builds more heat. It's also a cumulative thing that breaks down the tires strength. Anything from nothing happening at all to to reduced service life to blow outs or tread separation from the carcass could happen. There's just no way to know until it happens since it outside the OEM intended use. The bottom line of all that "blah blah blah" is that I wouldn't put the 130/90 18 MC II on my 2.15 rim. There's just too much difference in the rim width requirements. The problem with the MC II tires is they were intended for the modern "heavy cruiser" market (ie: where the money is) and those typically wear wider rims than the bikes from the 80's. Now, if they offered the MC II in the 83-92 Venture rim sizes, I'd have them on my bike tomorrow and probably wouldn't be looking at a custom 17" rim swap for my 83. Radials, due to their construction, require wider rims than bias ply tires. Even if you were to find a set of radials to fit the Venture's rim diameters, the rims were designed to wear bias ply tires. As such, the rims width are waaaaay undersize to fit any radial on the market. I wouldn't even try them, you're getting into dangerous territory trying to spoon radial tires on rim widths that are too narrow. A properly balanced trailer (any trailer) should only have about 10-15% of it's total weight on the tongue. So assuming you've got 50 lbs in the trailer (and properly distributed), you're only adding 5-7.5 lbs to the bike weight. The Venture is a heavy bike to start with and comes OEM with a 74H rear tire weight rating. When you're talking 400 lbs in riders, 5-10 lbs is pretty much not even worth considering. More important is stopping the total weight of the bike and trailer, but that's a convo about brakes and not what we're discussing here. Of greater concern than the trailer, the Venture is an arse heavy bike. Exactly where you plop all your luggage and yer butts. A 74 tire weight rating charts out at 827 lbs: https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/docs/Street-Tire-Load-Ratings.pdf . I know my 83 puts 327 lbs on the front tire with a full load of fuel on board (I actually scaled the front tire, rear was too heavy for the scale). That means 473 lbs is on the rear (assuming 800 lb bike) tire of the bike. With a 74 WR rear tire, that means my rear tire can support (within tire OEM ratings) 354 lbs of passenger and cargo. Going over that rating and you get into more heat in the carcass and maybe a failure, maybe not. Maybe just accelerated tire wear. No way to know. Now, keep in mind, people overload these bikes on a regular basis and you don't have them blowing tires, throwing tread or flying off they road everywhere. But if you are buying new tires and you know you're going to be overloaded, it's best to at least try and get a WR in a tire that fits your intended use. Good hunting.

Holy crap. So much wrong in that video is beggars the mind. Buddy should have just stopped when the van rear ended him and called the police. The van is wrong in that case no matter what he says. If he drives away, even better. Leaving hte scene of an accident and a whole host of other charges can be levied. But once buddy chases him down, they're both in for several charges. The "high road" is always the right road. Don't even get me started on how buddy was dressed while riding......

I'll tell ya what technique has saved me more than once if you're interested. It goes without saying that intersections are a place where you watch everything and expect everyone to do something stupid, but what really gets my antennae up are cars on the side of the road waiting to join traffic or those in the opposite lane stopped and trying to turn left across your lane. Those buggers are setting you up for a t-bone or a bad side swipe. The first thing I do is look for a driver. No driver means it's parked and likely not a threat. I look at it several times as I approach to make sure it is empty and not someone leaned over out of site and friggin with something on the floor or in the dash. Next I look at the positioning of the car. IE: is it in a reasonable spot where a competent driver would stop? Is it poking into the roadway? Is it stopped completely? Is it creeping forward? Is it angled to join traffic or is it positioned to cross? etc. This tells me where the mindset of the driver is. Patiently waiting and paying attention to traffic flow means he's likely to not jump out in front of me. Creeping forward means he's either not paying attention or is in a rush to get somewhere and the risk goes up exponentially that he will cut me off in some way. Only looking in my direction means he's looking to join traffic. Looking back and forth both ways means he's looking to cross traffic. Next thing I try to do is make eye contact with the driver. They can't see my eyes through the dark visor, but I can see theirs. Are they attentively looking at traffic? Are they staring down at their lap? Are they fiddling with a coffee or a GPS or a phone or something else? Do they look like they are talking to someone or yelling (ie: talking on a hands free)? It's more information about where their mind is and whether or not that may jump out in traffic. The next thing I do is run the "what if" questions. What if he cuts right across my path? What if he joins traffic? What is he joins traffic and slows right down in front of me? What if he cuts across my path and freezes to a dead stop when/if he sees me? The "what ifs" effect my plan: What are my escape routes? Do I have enough time to brake before I would hit him? If I do have time, what is my PNR (point of no return, basically the point where braking is no longer an option without hitting him)? Do I try and go around behind him if he keeps pulling out? Do I try to go around in front of him if he stops dead? Is the sidewalk clear and does it look like I could mount the curb if I had to? Is there a center turning lane I can use if I have to and is it clear? Is there oncoming traffic and can I use that lane for an emergency avoidance maneuver? Is the side of the road flat? Is it a ditch? Is it grass? Is it gravel? Is it paved? If I'm totally hooped and there are no options, I look at what i have left. I look for something to sideswipe instead of hit head on. If there is something to sideswipe, is it smooth or broken? I will always side swipe something like a guard rail instead of trees or a semi trailer or anything rough that can catch my legs (I could care less about the bike, it's expendable). On the V, I try to make sure the roll/crash bars will take the hit on a sideswipe and protect my legs if possible. That's why I look for something smooth to slide along vice something that will catch. All this happens in a split second. I will always take the escape route first, the sideswipe second and lastly the t-bone with brakes hard on to cut my speed as much as possible if the choice is not mine to make. I have that priority set down in m y mind before I even get on the bike. It's the logical way to proceed and if I've already made those decision before I get in to the furball it's one less decision to slow my thought process. It's the same principle we learn about ejecting from high speed aircraft with ejection seats: the most important thing is to decide before you go if you have to eject, you will. It saves you those split seconds of decision making that may mean life or death. Believe it or not, just braking to a stop is actually one of the options I try not to choose. I try to turn to my escape route and then brake, being careful to not lock up the brakes. I will straight brake if I have no choice, but stopping in the road means I have to rely on the a-hole behind me paying attention and not slamming me from the rear. I don't like relying on that because I can't see him and can't react if he's coming at me unaware I'm stopped. If I do have to stop dead in the road, the very first thing I do is look at the mirror and if I see absolutely anything that I don't like, the clutch and throttle are coming on and I'm getting out of the way. Even if i have to mount the curb or head down a ditch. It's not such a big deal from a dead stop because I don't have speed working against me to wash the bike out from under me. As an example, this process has saved me in a multi-car pile up scenario. I was driving a car in somewhat of a snowstorm one night. Some drunk a couple cars up in front of us lost control/crossed the double yellow and hit and oncoming car. The domino effect started in front of us. 4 or 5 cars just hammered into each other. with a deep ditch to my right and the oncoming traffic now in a smoking wreck ahead I steered to miss the wreck just in front of me and go it stopped. First thing I did was look in the rearview mirror and all I saw were headlights swiping back and forth in the dark. I knew the a-hole behind me was coming right at me. By this time was nowhere to go in the oncoming lane (wrecks were piling up on that side now and shoving them down the road towards me) so I cranked the wheel and power out towards the ditch. I got the RH front wheel in the ditch and stopped as I was out of options at that point and probably would have rolled the car. The wreck behind me stopped in the place where my car had just been. We got oout and started helping people when the smashing sounds stopped. Later, the RCMP officers who arrived on scene couldn't believe the carnage. It was everywhere. And, smack dab in the middle of the whole mess was my car, completely unscathed. Not a scratch. They actually had to tow cars away from around us before I could even drive out. The RCMP couldn't believe it until I told them the story and what I had done to protect myself and my passengers. Let's just say they were impressed and leave it at that.

Well, that's it: I've finally admitted to myself I'm not the young buck I used to be. Went to princess Auto and ordered a fold up shop crane to do the heavy lifting for me from now on.....

See, the thing is if someone ends up killing me it's not just a traffic offense. Everything from negligence to manslaughter are probable charges. That would make the judge and/or jury very interested in video footage of the event. But for just regular traffic confrontations, tapping the camera on the side of the helmet and informing the hot head "I've got it all on video" is usually enough to make them cower and slink away. It usually goes something like this: (I also have an HD dash cam in my truck no that's not me on the video ) We all know when we've done something wrong, admitting it is quite another thing. It takes strength of character to admit you're wrong and take responsibility for your actions, those are qualities I find very lacking in society these days. If just the threat of video gets that guy out of my face that's enough, I'm happy with just that outcome and it fully justifies what I spent on the setup. Anything that diffuses or ends a confrontation without a scuffle is worth it to me. I don't care why they go away, just that they go away. Defensive riding and controlling your temper are absolutely the best way to ride. Sure, you may not get that satisfying instant release of your anger, but you get out of the situ and on with you life that much sooner. For me it's all about getting home alive, in one piece and able to hug and kiss my wife and daughter. At the end of the day, that's all that really matters.

Unfortunately, no. The middle drive is part of the engine casings. Yamaha shaft drive bikes prior to the xvz line (ie: XS, XJ, etc) had separate middle drives, but not the ventures. The second gen Venture engine the same basic architecture as a 1st gen. Yammy just bolted on some covers and fins and changed things like carbs, ports, cams, gear ratios, etc. Here's a pic of a split xvz case: http://www.bikersassociationofnorthdevon.co.uk/images/VMAX96.jpg Assembled: http://www.venturers.org/Tech_Library/second/large/Repair_19.jpg Xs1100 style middle drive: http://www.muffsmotorsportsllc.com/products/CMP/CMPbig/CMPbig-694.JPG Assembled: http://i111.photobucket.com/albums/n122/anotherbikerboy/DSCF2491.jpg Unfortunately, youre stuck splitting the case on an xvz to get to the transmission/middle drive. Now if its the yokes or the u joint, you can get to that without messing with the engine on an xvz. Cheers.

Can't really add to the troubleshooting for ya, but if you do have to get into the transmission, the only way to get in there is to split the cases. Sorry, you probably didn't want to hear that....

Oh no, they are for sure in the wrong. No doubts about that. Nothing wrong with getting mad that someone almost hit you. I'm no saint either, I get mad and curse and yell. I just do it in my helmet or in my car. But the law takes a very dim view of individuals doing something about that anger. Anything seen as confrontation and you're viewed as the agressor and being wrong. Doesn't mean they didn't make a traffic violation, but that doesn't mean you can do an assault (what the confrontation is seen as legally), which is seen as worse than the traffic violation. Its kinda the "two wrongs don't make a right" thing. If a cop pulls up and sees you're steaming angry but are controlling that anger, I find the opinion on who's at fault swings to the one controlling his anger. I find a cool head and the helmet cam goes a long way when someone decides to be an @ss about traffic stuff too. I've had people confront me after cutting me off, wander into my lane, etc. while I've stopped by the road and waiting for the adrenaline to burn out of my system. I might be shaking and angry, but I just talk very calmly and cooly and when they start with the yelling and BS I point to my helmet cam and say "I've got it all on video. I can voice dial from inside this helmet. Do you want me to call the police and see where this goes?" To this day, no one has said yes and everyone has just shut up and left as quickly as they can get out of there....funny thing is, there's been a couple times that's happened and the camera battery was dead.

Problem is, when you exit your vehicle (or get off the bike) you've shown clear intent to escalate (in the eyes of the law) and that's considered aggression.. In the legal sense, if nothing happened (ie:damage or injury) then the two parties are expected to just go on their way. Mainly beciase nothing happened except some people got a good scare. A reasonable person is expected to calm down and move on. If there is an accident, police are to be called (in Canada there's a dollar amount in damages where police report it, most provinces its 500 bucks) and they deal with the particulars and any legal bits. No matter what happens, whoever shows aggression to the other first is wrong. Confronting someone is considered aggression. I'm not saying I agree with it, just that that's the way it goes down in the police/courts eyes. Now, chasing someone down a street? As far as the law is concerned: road rage and indefensible.....

I always ride with a helmet cam (more so my wife can prove the other driver was at fault and killed me). I always ride defensively. I always expect the other driver to do something stupid. I always leave myself an escape route. I always just pull off and sit down or stop for a coffee after a near miss. Kept me alive in 35-odd years of riding. Raging after an incident never fixes anything, it only makes it worse....even though I may be raging just below the surface.....

Ok. So after a 40 min walk out to the garage (it's 25 feet away by the way!) I've had a look at a couple master cylinders. The switches are interchangeable in the housing from what I can see. At least my 83 and 87 housings are. My 83 doesn't have cruise, the 87 does/did. Pop the little plastic cover off the lever pivot bolt on your 84. Just stretch it open enough that it will slide off the bolt. On the underside is a hole. Up in that hole is one way plastic clip that holds the switch in. Pull a little bit of pull pressure on the switch and very lightly depress the plastic tab with something that fits in the hole. It's fragile (old plastic), so be gentle. Once the tab is depressed enough, the switch will slide right out of the brake housing. Do the same with the 87 master cylinder housing. Once the 87 switch is out, just slide the 84 cruise brake switch in until you hear/feel a "click". Presto, you're done. Now you can just plug the cruise brake switch right into your bikes wiring harness as OEM. No muss, no fuss.

Nope, she loves me. That's enough!

Yeah, my days of lugging around 300-400 lb engine blocks are over I think. Already thinking about getting a rollaround hoist for the garage to lift heavy things....

Not at all vain. Self image is a very important part of mental health. Mental health is essential to recovery of physical health. You go right on worrying about your hair and do what is needed to make yourself feel right.

Lol! I usually get dirty looks when I bring home a wig for the missus!

Congratulations, job well done. Duty done, honors gathered. Now go enjoy your retirement.

I'm thinking the 87 master he has is probably a standard model without cruise. The 86 model wiring harness I have to put on my 83 has the "break outs" for the anti dive solenoids further down the harness. Edit: just had a quick look at a 90-93 diagram and it seems the EAND relay is triggered off the brake switches. But it was a quick look and its a little hard to follow on a 7" tablet....

Well, you're not going to find radials to fit the rims you have. Bias ply rims are too narrow for radials. You're kind of stuck looking for bias ply options or maybe a cross ply (another type of bias ply) if you can find them. Cross plys are generally tougher due to the carcass construction and a higher belt count. Less ballooning at speed too. That's tougher in the carcass, not the tread surface. Cross plys are what I consider kind of a step between older tech bias plys and modern steel belted radials. I'd have radials on the Venture tomorrow if I could find a 120/70R 17 with a decent load rating. The V pushes them within about 90 odd lbs of thier rating on the front tire. Its just such a heavy pig of a bike. The 160-170 radial rears have plenty of capacity, but the fronts are a PITA. I may just bite the bullet and run some 120/70r17's on a 17x3.5 rim up front and see what I get. Cant help you with the bias ply options, not really my cup o' tea. If I have to run bias tires, I usually just get what fits at a decent "middle of the road" price and just run 'em 'till they wear out.....

My missus is the same way, no interest in riding but perfectly happy as pax. She had her own bikes when she was younger (long before she met me) and got her fill of it. It also didn't help that her first bike was an R6. Never really scared her, but she never really was comfortable with the power and handling either. She also kind of got it beciase her ex-husband was into racing (at Shubie) and it seemed to fit their lifestyle at the time. That's another thing she never wants to be involved with again: racing.