[MG]

Anyone fitted these to the rear shocks to lower the rear around 25-30mm?

[Radnoc]

Yes I fitted some a couple of months ago, as I am only 5ft 9in and only 29'' inside leg, made all the difference when backing up, feels lighter too. One disadvantage is more difficult to put on the centre stand, so i cut the feet off with a disk cutter and 20mm off the stand  legs and took it down the road to the truck shop to weld the feet back on.
Now its great and easier to put on the stand than original. Well worth doing!
Regards
Radnoc

[MG]

Hi Radnoc,
Can you post some detailed pictures of the shocks installed because to me it does not look like they can fit without the interference from the springs. Glad you managed it, hope my fears are unjustified.
Also how did you find removing the original fittings.
Cheers
Mark

[Marcsen]

I have a installation video if you want .

[MG]

Hi Marcson,
That would great.. I really want to see the shocks fitted to the bike with the new fittings.
Cheers again.
Mark

[Marcsen]

Meanwhile take a look here .

Starts at 8.20

https://youtu.be/D3dIlHM5_hg

[MG]

Cheers Marcsen,
These on the video are slightly different than the those I received. But same result, I would like to see a picture of the gaps between the inside of the shock springs and the chain on one side and the calliper on the other.
Cheers
Mark   

[viczena]

I never understand why it is so popular to lower a bike. Every aspect of motorcycle physics and dynamic gets worse.

Are there so many little boys and girls driving a bike? Who are dependent on lowering the bike?

[NVDucati]

I never understand why it is so popular to lower a bike. Every aspect of motorcycle physics and dynamic gets worse.

Are there so many little boys and girls driving a bike? Who are dependent on lowering the bike?

Very provocative statement. Perhaps you can explain why.
Is there a allowable range of lowering or raising a motorcycle?
What if one makes the foot pegs more narrow or higher if they lower it?

Your explanation will help us decide if we agree or disagree.   (perhaps a separate thread)

[6504me]

Very provocative statement. Perhaps you explain why.
Is there a allowable range of lowering or raising a motorcycle?
What if one makes the foot pegs more narrow or higher if they lower it?

Your explanation will help us decide if we agree or disagree.   (perhaps a separate thread)

+1

[Marcsen]

Cheers Marcsen,
These on the video are slightly different than the those I received. But same result, I would like to see a picture of the gaps between the inside of the shock springs and the chain on one side and the calliper on the other.
Cheers
Mark   

[viczena]

I have once written all of it together for Harleys, where lowering the shocks is a mass phenomenon.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=de&tl=en&u=https://www.g-homeserver.com/forum/harley-davidson/136-harley-fahrwerk-6-11-stossd-mpfer-sinn-und-unsinn-progressive-412-hagon

[NVDucati]

I have once written all of it together for Harleys, where lowering the shocks is a mass phenomenon.

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=de&tl=en&u=https://www.g-homeserver.com/forum/harley-davidson/136-harley-fahrwerk-6-11-stossd-mpfer-sinn-und-unsinn-progressive-412-hagon

I read that post you linked to. Thanks for using Google translator. It works pretty well.
   For the most part it is addressing something different than the folks here who are installing the shorter mounting blocks. Over there the Harley owners were installing shorter shocks with less travel. Your points about that are generally true. However, here the shock travel is not changed. Only the margin of clearance between the rear fender, etc, is changed.
   Over there you mention the change in caster. You are not wrong. But it is very small in effect and can be easily re-managed by sliding the triple trees down on the fork tubes a tic.
   Over there you bring up the center of gravity. I disagree (and not just with you). You correctly described the increased need for "lateral inclination" (effort) to initiate a turn with a lowered CoG. However, you lost me by saying "By the way, the most(best) cornering bikes of all are the long-legged KTM SuperMoto versions." I don't see the MotoGP garages hustling to emulate those KTMs
   So for me, I disagree with your short declarative statement made on this forum. Still, nicely written and adds to the conversation. Thanks

[MG]

Hi Marcsen
Thanks for the pictures of the left hand side, could you do the same for the other side?
Cheers
Mark

[viczena]

   Over there you bring up the center of gravity. I disagree (and not just with you). You correctly described the increased need for "lateral inclination" (effort) to initiate a turn with a lowered CoG. However, you lost me by saying "By the way, the most(best) cornering bikes of all are the long-legged KTM SuperMoto versions." I don't see the MotoGP garages hustling to emulate those KTMs
   So for me, I disagree with your short declarative statement made on this forum. Still, nicely written and adds to the conversation. Thanks

MotGp are fast. But not the fastest in cornering. They are fast with a hard accelleration. These are other design cornerstones. For example keeping stable at high speed. And at hard braking/accelleration. But they are also not lowered. They dont play in the "my shock is 1" lower than yours" olympics. Would you try to fight a much lower powered KTM supermoto with a MotoGP in the france alps? I doubt.

It is pure physics, that a lowered bike needs a larger radius with the same angle. It looses ground clearance. The bike looses stability du to changed geometry.

You are right that the worst effects of lowered shocks dont come in play if you keep the shock itself and you just change the lower part of the suspension.

But why would I want to lower a bike if I am not a dwarf? Lowering is good for cars, bad for bikes.