spud gun camoflauged as a tool tube, where to mount it though?

[Mike]

Brian, The torsion spring will require a creative setup to measure the load. It's on a smaller radius than the end of the original spring lever. In order to get the same in-lbs of torque on the eccentric shaft, it takes more tension at the smaller radius. The spring maker has a special setup and tool to measure the torque on a torsion spring like this. While it's nice (and quieter!) to have the rubber on the sprockets, the work is done by the teeth, right? The rubber is high enough that the chain doesn't sit down into the gullet like I'd normally expect a drive chain to fit. This causes the chain to slide on the rubber, and then impact (and chew into it) if the system isn't properly tensioned. all the best, Mike

[boulder_adv_rider]

Bill - A snug system is best. I concur. The snap loading with slack is bad juju. Too tight (whether or not this is even possible) and under more extreme conditions is what I'm pondering. It's quite possible my sprockets wore-out due to damage associated with slack. However, I adjusted my doo regularly and did the EM upgrade circa 3k with the small spring. My latest oil screen cleaning didn't give me much debris. Laughingly, I was a bit disappointed considering there was no balancer slack adjustability remaining even with small spring. Under normal conditions, clearly this is working and offering very nice longevity. In summary, here at 20k miles with new sprockets, in-spec chain and no play in front balancer or crank bearings, the large spring doesn't offer much pull or longevity in adjustabilty. In fact, with the spring attached the bolt sits roughly in the middle of the doo; this gives the large spring .208" of stretch--not much. I don't know what the position (bolt and spring stretch) is for a 0-mile, new engine either. But once everything is back together, and I get some miles on, most likely I'll tear into it and take some measurements. I inspired to hear the new torsion spring hasn't induced any problems. But what about for our more demanding riders? For example, you got 30k+ miles from your OEM chain and WD-40. I barely got out alive from Prudhoe Bay with 10k on my OEM chain. Again, completely trashed with rollers missing, etc., and I maintained it according to the service manual. Thanks - Brian

[boulder_adv_rider]

Mike - I'll use the same method to measure tension. I hook a meter to the right side of doohickey and pull very gently until rotation starts. I do three measurements and record the average. It's not perfect, but it gives me values for relative force applied by each spring at this moment. It's quick and fairly representative of the pressure when fixed by the adjuster bolt and doo. Yes, the teeth of the sprocket do the work. And apparently the roller isn't resting on the gullet (or valley) like a normal chain/sprocket relationship. This is what I'm saying. My measurements indicate the rubber is keeping the chain from going deep into the gullet. This is consistent with measuring the minimum diameter across all of the sprockets, new and old, at 1.903" (the same) with exception of the old idler sprocket I got 1.898". So the gullets don't appear to get deeper with wear. So either the teeth wear which allows the rollers to go deeper, or the rubber wears which allows the links to go lower and the rollers to ride deeper. I think it's the latter which means the rubber is critical to slack determination. I understand your response a bit better now. It makes sense you're saying a properly tension system avoids the biggest, damaging whiplashing effect of slack on this rubber. Got it. Now could higher tension with the torsion spring force the chain deeper into the gullet to the point it's detrimental to rubber's longevity? According to Wattman testimony, "no" from his experience under normal conditions. But how about under more stressful conditions? Bubbling hot oil, hardened metal links rubbing, (think wheelies, heavy loads, stop/go, uphill/downhill, etc.). I fear the rubber ends up the a one- legged man in an ass-kicking contest. I think to a good degree the rider is relying on the integrity of this rubber in determining slack almost as much as adjusting itself. My confident guess is if I were to remove all this rubber right now, I'd have zero slack adjustability in the system just like re- installing my old sprockets. One thing I'm going to doo to reduce the risk of major whiplash is increase the frequency of my doo adjustments. However, nothing beats going in and inspecting the whole system. The adjustment reset process won't adjust for damaged rubber if the chain isn't riding on the damaged section at the time of the adjustment. Just a closing thought... Brian

[George Evans]

Well, as always, I've not been following the postings as close as a dedicated KLR rider should but in spite of that I must make a comment about all the discussion about tension on the balancer chain. I guess I should say this comment is specifically about the concept of having too much tension on the chain. The reason I feel qualified to comment on this is that 3 or 4 years ago, mabye more, an individual posted a mod of the balancer chain adjuster that put a great deal more tension on the balancer chanin. I think the guys user name was PeteChester or vice versa or something like that. Anyhow, his idea was to turn the doohkickey adjuster ( the tab the spring hooks to) upside down and then stretch the spring over to a modified bolt that hat been installed in the cam chain guide, I believe. Bottom line is I did this. It puts a lot of tension on the gear that tensions the balancer chain. A lot of people gave the inventor of this mod and anyone that implemented this mod a lot of shit. Now here is the real bottom line. I did this mod with about 15,000 miles on my 01. I now have run the dog shit of this bike and have 44,000 miles on this engine and have not had a bit of problem with the balancer chain or anything related to the balancer chain system. I figure that with 44,000 miles I'm going to run it till it drops and not give another thought about the balancer chain or the excess tension that will surely make it fail within a few thousands miles according to the naysayers of old. What I'm getting at is that I don't believe that the tension is that critical as long as you have enough tension to control the chain. I easily have at least 3 to 4 times the tension that either a torsional dohickey spring or a standard spring puts on the balancer chain. It's still happily running down the road at 44,000 miles and I talked to it tonight (after 6 or 8 Amber Bocks) and it said it was ready to start the next half century. Honest - no shit... Bottom, Bottom, Line! Winter's coming. Get our your insulated bibs, smartwool underwear, balaclava, and Aerostitch insulated Elk hide gloves and get ready for some winter riding. It's my favorite and most fun time of the year for riding and it should be yours too! My motto: Worry Less - Ride More Just a few clouded thoughts from an out of control biker in Nebraska. George PS: and for Gods sake take the windshield off and enjoy a nice quiet ride.....just do it.... -- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "boulder_adv_rider" wrote:

> > Mike - I'll use the same method to measure tension. I hook a meter > to the right side of doohickey and pull very gently until rotation > starts. I do three measurements and record the average. It's not > perfect, but it gives me values for relative force applied by each > spring at this moment. It's quick and fairly representative of the > pressure when fixed by the adjuster bolt and doo. > > Yes, the teeth of the sprocket do the work. And apparently the > roller isn't resting on the gullet (or valley) like a normal > chain/sprocket relationship. This is what I'm saying. My > measurements indicate the rubber is keeping the chain from going deep > into the gullet. This is consistent with measuring the minimum > diameter across all of the sprockets, new and old, at 1.903" (the > same) with exception of the old idler sprocket I got 1.898". So the > gullets don't appear to get deeper with wear. So either the teeth > wear which allows the rollers to go deeper, or the rubber wears which > allows the links to go lower and the rollers to ride deeper. I think > it's the latter which means the rubber is critical to slack > determination. > > I understand your response a bit better now. It makes sense you're > saying a properly tension system avoids the biggest, damaging > whiplashing effect of slack on this rubber. Got it. Now could > higher tension with the torsion spring force the chain deeper into > the gullet to the point it's detrimental to rubber's longevity? > According to Wattman testimony, "no" from his experience under normal > conditions. But how about under more stressful conditions? Bubbling > hot oil, hardened metal links rubbing, (think wheelies, heavy loads, > stop/go, uphill/downhill, etc.). I fear the rubber ends up the a one- > legged man in an ass-kicking contest. > > I think to a good degree the rider is relying on the integrity of > this rubber in determining slack almost as much as adjusting itself. > My confident guess is if I were to remove all this rubber right now, > I'd have zero slack adjustability in the system just like re- > installing my old sprockets. One thing I'm going to doo to reduce > the risk of major whiplash is increase the frequency of my doo > adjustments. However, nothing beats going in and inspecting the > whole system. The adjustment reset process won't adjust for damaged > rubber if the chain isn't riding on the damaged section at the time > of the adjustment. Just a closing thought... > > Brian >

[Mike]

Brian, The post above by George Evans references the original spring developed by Pete Chester. His design required drilling the balancer lever. It was also installed with the preload of 180 degrees!!!! I don't remember the wire size off the top of my head. IIRC the preload tension was greater than I wanted the average guy to fight with. I also didn't want the average guy to try to drill a fairly close hole in stuff anywhere from 44C (my lever) to 55C (Jake's lever). I had been discussing a torsion spring about from day one with a couple of other parties, but it didn't get done at that point for several reasons. I don't think tension from any of the springs on the market is going to cause damage when properly installed. If excessive tension was going to cause chain wear or bearing issues it would have been known by now. I know of several people that routinely install the 35mm spring on a bike with low miles. BTW, I do have shorter extension springs available. Have you noticed how large the balancer chain is? I know there was one "guru" that made noise about spring tension causing bearing damage a couple of years ago, but zero data was provided to back up any of that particular rant. I know that this persona had also routinely replaced the factory bearings with aftermarket bearing due to the "low quality" of the factory bearings - according to him. Watt-man isn't all that easy on the chain. I've personally seen him wheelie the bike a few times. He does ride very smoothly during commuting. I know a guy that got over 60K miles on the OEM drive chain, including some dyno time.* He's running a 705 with stage 2 head, and a 16 tooth countershaft sprocket, all of which should cause the engine to fragment instantly.* all the best, Mike *all of this without a prosthetic chain device - VBG grin here for those that know.

[Mike]

Sorry, I forgot to say torsion spring - inserted below

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "Mike" wrote: > > Brian, > > The post above by George Evans references the original TORSION spring > developed by Pete Chester. His design required drilling the balancer > lever. It was also installed with the preload of 180 degrees!!!! I > don't remember the wire size off the top of my head. IIRC the preload > tension was greater than I wanted the average guy to fight with. I > also didn't want the average guy to try to drill a fairly close hole > in stuff anywhere from 44C (my lever) to 55C (Jake's lever). I had > been discussing a torsion spring about from day one with a couple of > other parties, but it didn't get done at that point for several reasons. > > I don't think tension from any of the springs on the market is going > to cause damage when properly installed. > > If excessive tension was going to cause chain wear or bearing issues > it would have been known by now. I know of several people that > routinely install the 35mm spring on a bike with low miles. BTW, I do > have shorter extension springs available. Have you noticed how large > the balancer chain is? I know there was one "guru" that made noise > about spring tension causing bearing damage a couple of years ago, but > zero data was provided to back up any of that particular rant. I know > that this persona had also routinely replaced the factory bearings > with aftermarket bearing due to the "low quality" of the factory > bearings - according to him. > > Watt-man isn't all that easy on the chain. I've personally seen him > wheelie the bike a few times. He does ride very smoothly during commuting. > > I know a guy that got over 60K miles on the OEM drive chain, including > some dyno time.* He's running a 705 with stage 2 head, and a 16 tooth > countershaft sprocket, all of which should cause the engine to > fragment instantly.* > > all the best, > Mike > > *all of this without a prosthetic chain device - VBG grin here for > those that know. >

[Bill Watson]

This has been an interesting thread. Brian, my guess here is that "all" the damage was caused when the engine was run with a broken doo and it beat the rubber up. I think that's where I was headed. You've done a good job of actually measuring things as you think it all through, which is to be commended as most don't spend the time or think about how things work or why things are done a certain way. So - bravo! I typically set up torsion spring bikes with an additional 45 degrees of preload by drilling the case hole at "6:45" rather than "5:15". (The other side of the lug). George, thanks for sending your data as well about your results with the most preload of all! I do remember that early mod and it's good to get another piece of data to say that higher tension doesn't seem to have a downside. [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Ed Dobson]

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Bill Watson wrote:

> > This has been an interesting thread. Brian, my guess here is that > "all" the damage was caused when the engine was run with a broken doo > and it beat the rubber up. I think that's where I was headed. You've > done a good job of actually measuring things as you think it all > through, which is to be commended as most don't spend the time or think > about how things work or why things are done a certain way. So - bravo! > > I typically set up torsion spring > bikes with an additional 45 degrees of preload by drilling the case > hole at "6:45" rather than "5:15". (The other side of the lug). > George, thanks for sending your data as well about your results with > the most preload of all! I do remember that early > mod and it's good to get another piece of data to say that higher > tension doesn't seem to have a downside.

Bill, Thanks for your input on this subject. Is the extra preload you are talking about as depicted in the following link? http://johnbiccum.smugmug.com/gallery/2938841_wJjyu#158603165_vYwCq Assuming the aftermarket torsion spring installed per the vendor's instructions duplicates the idler shaft torque of a new KLR650 of a particular model year, if I may ask, what was your specific technical rationale for increasing the torsion spring preload 50% (ref. msg. 186365)? TIA ED

[boulder_adv_rider]

Mike - Based upon observation/experience you guys all seem to agree any increase in spring tension from any of the readily-available helical springs or new torsion spring does not increase risk of excessive wear on the rubber-integrated sprockets (my focus). I'm not going into bearing matters or extend my research to effects on the entire balancer system. My chain appears fine and bearings, too. The real failure point for me was complete loss of slack adjustability/mitigation because the sprocket dampening material wore- out. I'm no guru and I'm limited to data from my observation(s). It's why I started this thread--to share my experience/obs and engage those with more experience. From all this, Watt-man and I seem to agree the dampening material most likely got damaged by slack at SOME point which is consistent with your mantra of keeping the system properly adjusted. I'd like to add the integrity of these rubber-integrated sprockets is critical to maintaining a properly tensioned balancer system. This rubber is not just for noise reduction. As in my case, if it's severely damaged or otherwise removed, this results in 100% loss of slack mitigation capacity. In other words, the doo and spring mean nothing if these sprockets are severely damaged or worn- out. And once these wear-out, the chain will be grinding constantly into the bottom of the case, and it's my opinion you're at greater risk to damaging other balancer components like bearings, chain and ultimately your entire engine. So keep an eye on these sprockets and the amount of adjustability that remains. Don't just slap on a spring that yields poor tension and longevity...especially if you have little adjustability remaining. Inspect the entire balancer system whenever you're in the hood. If we agree the added tension is no worry, the torsion spring appears to be the better alternative to maintaining tension throughout the doo's RoM. I haven't tested the torsion spring's longevity (read: survivability), but others are saying/experiencing it's bombproof (no issues). I'll rely on these assertions and give it some testing myself. One thing I'm going to do is increase the frequency of my doo adjustments to every oil change (2,000 miles). At some point, we'll open it up again and see how we did. Lastly, I appreciate everyone's contributions. Hopefully, this engages listas to become more familiar with their KLR (balancer ecosystem in particular) and helps people decide how best to maintain it. It's quite a privilege to have such a forum and vast group of experienced technicians, riders...and philosophers. Of course, my hat comes off to people like (you) Mike, Bill, and others who aspire constantly to build a better KLR for everyone. Best - Brian

[boulder_adv_rider]

Bill - Thanks. I'd like to hear response(s) to Ed's question. I assumed the 5PM location was adequate--servicing the adjuster's entire range of motion with plenty of tension. Why go tighter?? Also, I'm curious about the grinding of the clutch gear surface in two places in the (John Biccum) photos. Again, I didn't see this procedure in the install instructions. Is it necessary? And why not all four spans? Jeff Saline and I discussed this a bit ago when I raised (resurfaced?) the issue after my first torsion spring install. I didn't have a clearance issue at the time, but worry (somehow) this clearance closes (spring moves) and the gear strikes it. Jeff Saline discussed a groove technique he uses to prevent movement which makes sense. Obviously, the person grinding this gear knows something or has concern as well. Knee jerk? Preemptive? Maybe. All I can say is...in a case-match, starter gear vs. spring arm, I'm betting on the gear. And we're all passionately aware of a tension-less adjuster dooing naughty things... Brian

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Bill Watson wrote: > > This has been an interesting thread. Brian, my guess here is that > "all" the damage was caused when the engine was run with a broken doo > and it beat the rubber up. I think that's where I was headed. You've > done a good job of actually measuring things as you think it all > through, which is to be commended as most don't spend the time or think > about how things work or why things are done a certain way. So - bravo! > > I typically set up torsion spring > bikes with an additional 45 degrees of preload by drilling the case > hole at "6:45" rather than "5:15". (The other side of the lug). > George, thanks for sending your data as well about your results with > the most preload of all! I do remember that early > mod and it's good to get another piece of data to say that higher > tension doesn't seem to have a downside. > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >