what to doo next? replaced all 3 gears...no more slack'in

[Robert Wayne]

Looking at a set of Kenda 761's for my A18. Does anyone have any constructive advice as to street traction (wet and dry) and expected mileage with this model? Thanks! robert [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Adam]

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Robert Wayne wrote:

> > Looking at a set of Kenda 761's for my A18. Does anyone have any

constructive advice as to street traction (wet and dry) and expected mileage with this model? Thanks! robert

> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] >

No wet expierence yet but I love the dry performance. 3,000 miles and still looks good. Probably a 5,000 mile tire. Can easily scrape pegs with these babies. Adam

[mikeypep]

I just used the 761 on the rear. Handling was good, but definitely squirmy. It never gave it up, but always slid out a bit, fro the start like I rode over a paint line (I didn't). Tire life was quite good. I was at 7000 when I got rid of it. The center tread disappears very fast, but then the tire lasts forever, or so it seems. Off road traction just plain sucks, but it was no worse than the Gripster that preceeded it or the Scorpion that replaced it. Overall; good tire for the price. "Ya gets what ya pays for"

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "Adam" wrote: > > --- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, Robert Wayne wrote: > > > > Looking at a set of Kenda 761's for my A18. Does anyone have any > constructive advice as to street traction (wet and dry) and expected > mileage with this model? Thanks! robert > > > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > No wet expierence yet but I love the dry performance. 3,000 miles and > still looks good. Probably a 5,000 mile tire. Can easily scrape pegs > with these babies. > > Adam >

[E.L. Green]

--- In DSN_KLR650@yahoogroups.com, "mikeypep" wrote:

> I just used the 761 on the rear. Handling was good, but definitely > squirmy. It never gave it up, but always slid out a bit, fro the > start like I rode over a paint line (I didn't). Tire life was quite > good. I was at 7000 when I got rid of it. The center tread disappears > very fast, but then the tire lasts forever, or so it seems. Off road > traction just plain sucks, but it was no worse than the Gripster that > preceeded it or the Scorpion that replaced it. > > Overall; good tire for the price. "Ya gets what ya pays for"

I wouldn't call it squirmy, but as you heeled over the tread opened up and it definitely told you that you were leaning over further than it was happy leaning. But I still got pretty decent traction out of it. Offroad, the comparison with the Gripster is apt, except that I think it's slightly better when you hit mud than the Gripster is (the tread is more open and slings mud better). Not that it's *good* in that situation. All in all, it's like Mikey said -- "ya gets what ya pays for". Me, when it came to replace my 761's, I bought Gripsters. Yeah, more expensive, but they handle better thanks to the superior European rubber and isn't any worse off-road if you air'em down.

[Ed Dobson]

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

> > 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 > -------------- > Yes Ed, nice work there - exactly the photos. Some are my photos,

some are Saline's, and I added the words and graphics.

> > As for why I exceeded the mfg's recommendation, I was willing to

take the risk. It seemed to me that no load in the system is the worst end solution - I hadn't heard of high-tensioned systems having problems such as the original Pete Chester "flip it and yank big time" method that George evans has also had good luck with. The mfg's recommendation, on the bike I was installing the torsion spring on generated about 70 degrees of preload in the system. So after 35 degrees of rotation (wear), you'll be to half load, and when it's moved 70 degrees there is no tension.

> > I've preloaded at the other hole on a number of bikes which leads to

115 degrees of preload, if you will. This is a higher initial preload, but the idea was that I'm (we're) too lazy to go in later and add preload as the system wears, and it seemed that this way the system will have sufficient preload in it for the life of the bike.

> > Without an attachment, it's essentially that I made a plot

beforehand of "torque vs. deflection" for the stock system, a torsion spring at 70 degrees and one at 115 and went for 115.

> > Further - as Mike points out, I have a pre-production torsion spring

which had a different starting end on it. It looks like I set it up originally with 115 degrees of preload on my particular bike and have had no problems, so I do the same to other bikes.

> > I'm sure that bike-to-bike variation might allow you to use the

"5:15" hole and still get more pre-twist on the torsion spring than other bikes. My rule of thumb is "pick the hole which gives you 90 degrees or more". Bill, Your reply's are much appreciated and of great benefit to all. Thanks. ED