While I'm waiting

[Rob Farmer]

Stuck in the mud with my project airhead "confirmation of year of manufacture letter" so I thought I'd start on the next project

Going to put a special together using WP forks and an 1100 rear end (Thanks Andy )

Has anybody we know done this with a Paralever frame? I've jury rigged the frame together and appear to have an offset from the centre line. just need to know what other folk have done about this.

It looks worse than it is on the picture, the forks and subframe are just resting in.

 

[sycomoto]

funny that

cos thas about how out of alignment camille is. and have no idea why, i looked at moving the swingarm across but the drivshaft would foul the inside.

 

[Flipfly]

I don't see the problem Rob.

I suppose you could offset the yokes to match the rear

IIRC you can do it by fitting the bevel box from the R100GS to the 100 swingarm with some magical jiggery pokery.

 

[Benjamin M]

I don't see the problem Rob.

I suppose you could offset the yokes to match the rear

IIRC you can do it by fitting the bevel box from the R100GS to the 100 swingarm with some magical jiggery pokery.

I don't quite follow you, 100 to 100? Are you missing a 1?

Silly question but would the fit be any different with a mono frame? It's just that all the ones that I have seen converted on the web have been G/S's..

 

[Spout]

Hi res pic off HPN site:

http://www.hpn.de/bilder/high_resolution/kordys2.jpg

Looks like some frame mods going on.

 

[Shep]

Hi res pic off HPN site:

http://www.hpn.de/bilder/high_resolution/kordys2.jpg

Looks like some frame mods going on.

My oh My! Dosn't that look lovely


No point in fekking about Rob, make one of them

 

[Kenny]

Looks like a little bit of angle grinding and then a trip to Verns for the welding of offset mountings That back wheel is obviously to far over if to be used on the road. Should be finished for the Wee-Kend then?

 

[Rob Farmer]

My oh My! Dosn't that look lovely


No point in fekking about Rob, make one of them

That's the look I want shep only with the WP forks.

I was looking at GaryH's bike and a few others. I need to ditch the 1100 Rim and fit a conventional centre laced narrower rim with around 20mm offset to the right.

 

[Flipfly]

I don't quite follow you, 100 to 100? Are you missing a 1?

Silly question but would the fit be any different with a mono frame? It's just that all the ones that I have seen converted on the web have been G/S's..

Sorry, 100 bevel box to 1100 swingarm

Although, I believe that the 100 bevel box works with the 100 swingarm 8 times out of ten

 

[AliBaba]

I was looking at GaryH's bike and a few others. I need to ditch the 1100 Rim and fit a conventional centre laced narrower rim with around 20mm offset to the right.

IMHO 20mm offset is to much.
I've seen bikes with 1100 swingarm and x-spoked wheels but I'm not sure if rims from a R100 or R1100 was used.

The bevelbox from the R1100 is known as a weak point, sure you want to downgrade?

 

[sycomoto]

Dude

Sorry, 100 bevel box to 1100 swingarm

Although, I believe that the 100 bevel box works with the 100 swingarm 8 times out of ten

You can't fit a 100 bevel onto an 1100 swing arm cos the 1100 has a canterlever bevelbox while the 100 is solid mounted.

 

[Rob Farmer]

You can't fit a 100 bevel onto an 1100 swing arm cos the 1100 has a canterlever bevelbox while the 100 is solid mounted.

That's news to me I think you mean the twin shock bevel box Si.

The 11XX has more of an offset built into it than the 100 to keep the alignment with the paralever arm.

 

[Rob Farmer]

The bevelbox from the R1100 is known as a weak point, sure you want to downgrade?

from the 1150 down to the mono g/s the bevels are all virtually identical and all share the same crown bearing. why are they weaker?

Mono on the left 1100/1150 on the right. The top bearings on the mono's are a weak spot trashing the outer cover when they screw up and spin in the casting, the taper bearing fitted to the Paralever and oilheads is a much improved design.

 

[AliBaba]

from the 1150 down to the mono g/s the bevels are all virtually identical and all share the same crown bearing. why are they weaker?

I don't know why they fail, you might find some information here:
http://www.ukgser.com/forums/showthread.php?t=159180

Somewhere in this part of the forum you can find (at least) one roadside repair: http://www.ukgser.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=303

But it doesn't have to be an issue for you.

 

[Rob Farmer]

The crown gear problem is common to all the models right back to the mono so I'm not too concerned. With the relatively low power from the airheads it shouldn't be such an issue.

 

[shafted]

from the 1150 down to the mono g/s the bevels are all virtually identical and all share the same crown bearing. why are they weaker?

Mono on the left 1100/1150 on the right. The top bearings on the mono's are a weak spot trashing the outer cover when they screw up and spin in the casting, the taper bearing fitted to the Paralever and oilheads is a much improved design.

My "86 Mono RT Bevel is identical to the one on the right.

 

[Beemerboff]

Part of the problem was that for a while BMW used off brand Romanian bearing and seals - all the wheel , swinging arm and steering head bearings and seals on my 2000 F650 GS failed within 10000 miles.
Replacing them with SKFs and brand name seals solved the problem.

They also had problems with clearance in the holes which house the bearings - the outer race of a bearing is compressed slightly when it is fitted, and this compression is taken into consideration when specifying the grade of bearing to be used - BMW simply got the clearances wrong and bearings, and the replacements, failed.

All sorted now, I think .