Stiffening the 2014 front springs

[Roadster Renovations]

I will be going to "Spyder in the Smokeys" with a brand new mod installed on my 2014 RTS. I have rode close to 500 miles with them in place and it looks like these are going to work well. This particular mod stiffens part of the spring, making the suspension more firm. There is a way to set it at 3 different levels of stiffness. The units install in minutes and this model will work for all 2013 & 2014 models. It does not reposition the shock angles from factory. Things are in the works for these to be made available here and on Amazon. I will post pictures of the mod after we get back. I want to see what other Spyder riders have to say about it. I tried them on a 2013 model and the rider came back and reported that his suspension improvement was immediately apparent.

 

[Chupaca]

Well..!!

I guess we will be opcorn:opcorn:ing...have a safe fun trip and enjoy the tighter suspension...:2thumbs:hyea:

 

[spacetiger]

Well, are you going to tell us what it is or post a pic? Or is this going to remain a mystery?

 

[bscrive]

Are you the one that is Ron's guinea pig? :thumbup::thumbup:

 

[Roadster Renovations]

These are fabricated by me in my shop. I make each one by hand (only way to make sure they are done right). I will post pics next week. Or see ya in the smokeys! I may even bring a few extras with me so that volunteers can try some product testing on their bikes. I will bring a wrench to install them. Won't have any for sale there. (Can't afford the $1500 vender costs) We can test the heck out of them though and we will be giving cards out so they can be ordered.

 

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I THINK MAYBE

:lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie:.......A spanking is headed your way..........just sayin......Mike :thumbup:

 

[BikerDoc]

Sounds interesting

 

[PMK]

Doc, to be more clear without photos yet are you really stiffening the spring or simply adding preload?

Preload on a spring sets ride height under a given load, for most stuff it is typically the machine and rider. Preload will also increase the initial force to let a spring compress and offer only an increase in force that was obtained by the preload change. The springs rate remains constant and does not change.

In order to increase spring RATE, you either replace the existing coil spring with a firmer coil or lessen the number of active coils in a soft spring.

A replacement coil is typically spring rate increased or decreased by manipulating the wire diameter and possibly the number of active coils. Springs with more active coils often provide a more smooth "feel" as they compress, whereas springs with fewer active coils often have a more "lively" feel. In some situations, the spring can be made from other materials such as titanium or even carbon fibre. These material changes can also change how a spring "feels" to the rider when in use, and obviously in his pocket also.

Adding preload by compressing an existing spring, simply shortens it when the shock assembly is fully extended (removed). There is no change in spring rate, however the increased preload spring will have the ability to raise the vehicles ride height or alter the sag dimensions.

A spring that is too soft for the rider, may have the rate increased by either removing a coil and shortening the spring. This gives less wire in the springs length to be manipulated (bent). Another method is to deactivate coils by installing one of the various devices such as rubber blocks to not allow the coils to compress.

I do not know what the "typical" rider weight and riding ability that was chosen by BRP when selecting suspension settings. From photos posted on this site and others, it is apparent that there certainly are riders much lighter than myself or the combined weight of my wife and I, and also there are riders much heavier than myself.

Simply adding preload for a heavier rider or team if riding two up will let the ride height increase, but the suspension will remain soft on account of being under sprung. In these cases a firmer spring is best to prevent the suspension from blowing through the stroke.

Conversely, a lighter rider, riding solo may find the suspension too firm in spring rate, and while the ride may seem performance oriented, the vehicle may use only a fraction of the few inches of available wheel travel.

Spring rate, preload and wheel travel all must play well together for the best best vehicle control and performance. In simple guidelines, if a vehicle is raised to the point in which the shock is fully extended and a dimension is noted. The vehicle is then lowered and without passengers or other payload a second dimension is noted, then a third check is done to obtain a dimension with rider(s) and payload, thee can be used to verify proper spring rate. Most often though, it is simpler to go with the first and last dimension and aim for approximately 30% shock compression with riders and payload. Also, this should be done with approx 3/4 full of fuel.

Seeing the specs for the Spyder, are I believe 5.2 inches of front wheel travel, this means the Spyder should sag 1.5 inches with riders onboard regardless of spring rate. Then after ride testing, the suspension movement and cornering lean can be evaluated and adjustments made from that observation.

This brings in the balance of spring rate vs anti swaybar stiffness.

Preload changes are great tuning tool for setting sag or ride heights. Proper springs or adjusted spring rates (deactivated coils or removed coils) are always best for machines load outside the engineers design criteria.

All the best with your project. I await the photos.

PK

 

[spacetiger]

PMK,

Thanks for posting this.

The RT-S suffers from soft springs. I say this based on my experience with a 2012 I bought new last year. I only weigh 205 and was surprised how soft the springs were. It wasn't until I added a nylon washer to a front shock that I could see how much the shock compressed after a ride. There are a few options out there to address this shortfall but they are pricey (aftermarket shocks). The upper shock relocation mounts are an interesting way to to potentially solve the problem as it tilts the shock so it is more vertical, but I still favor just getting stiffer springs on. I tried adding additional preload spacing, but that had limited success.

In time, if enough riders post the correct way to solve the problem like you have, the other riders will benefit. I think we still have too many riders out there posting solutions that remind me of the blood letting days as a cure for medical problems....

Jerry

 

[PMK]

PMK,

Thanks for posting this.

The RT-S suffers from soft springs. I say this based on my experience with a 2012 I bought new last year. I only weigh 205 and was surprised how soft the springs were. It wasn't until I added a nylon washer to a front shock that I could see how much the shock compressed after a ride. There are a few options out there to address this shortfall but they are pricey (aftermarket shocks). The upper shock relocation mounts are an interesting way to to potentially solve the problem as it tilts the shock so it is more vertical, but I still favor just getting stiffer springs on. I tried adding additional preload spacing, but that had limited success.

In time, if enough riders post the correct way to solve the problem like you have, the other riders will benefit. I think we still have too many riders out there posting solutions that remind me of the blood letting days as a cure for medical problems....

Jerry

Jerry
If this was a more performance based vehicle and / or had a more performance based rider group, the means to proper spring rates would be easy...

Say Johnny X weighs so much and rides a 2014 RTs, then Fred C weighs X and rides somethig different. As these people come to terms with their settings, and what springs (oem or aftermarket) plus their riding style is noted, a simple chart of what trends are working can be pinned for reference.

Overall, I suspect that just based on rider weight, and vehicle model and year, the results simply show what preload or springs people really need.

PK

 

[Roadster Renovations]

Mine work on the coil isolator concept.

 

[spacetiger]

Jerry
If this was a more performance based vehicle and / or had a more performance based rider group, the means to proper spring rates would be easy...

Say Johnny X weighs so much and rides a 2014 RTs, then Fred C weighs X and rides somethig different. As these people come to terms with their settings, and what springs (oem or aftermarket) plus their riding style is noted, a simple chart of what trends are working can be pinned for reference.

Overall, I suspect that just based on rider weight, and vehicle model and year, the results simply show what preload or springs people really need.

PK

PK - Yes, this could work in theory. The challenge would be how to get everyone's input so that they can be meaningful put on a single pinning so can contribute and the body of riders can benefit. I would worry that rider A would state there changes "worked" but there is no way to verify it.

But, this would be better than having no common source to see what everyone has done to resolve the soft (inadequate) spring rates.J

Jerry

 

[PMK]

PK - Yes, this could work in theory. The challenge would be how to get everyone's input so that they can be meaningful put on a single pinning so can contribute and the body of riders can benefit. I would worry that rider A would state there changes "worked" but there is no way to verify it.

But, this would be better than having no common source to see what everyone has done to resolve the soft (inadequate) spring rates.J

Jerry

Jerry, the simplest method is one where the vehicle model and year is stated, the rider weight with gear, then what spring rate gives proper sag or a set value say of 30%.

Setting up a race bike, we accomplish measurements based on free sag to race sag to assist in determining proper spring rate. In that situation, there is a lot more dynamics happening and the springs are critical in both straight line and cornering situations.

Also, the lighter the vehicle, the more difficult it becomes to find a best compromise. The most difficult suspension setups I have dealt with a on mountain bikes (yes pedal bikes) and model race cars. The easier ones are on full size road race bikes.

Jerry, also consider that while your machine was undersprung, you are riding one model in one model year. Different models of the same year or same models of different years could easily be different.

PK

 

[spacetiger]

Mine work on the coil isolator concept.

Doc,

I'll take a guess - PK, you correct me if I'm off base.

The isolator is effectively making the oem spring into 2 separate springs. You do this by inserting a devise between 2 coil windings of the spring and this devise locks the distance between these two coil windings so it doesn't allow these coils to compress. By reducing the effective length of the oem spring, the 2 new shorter springs will each be stiffer than the oem spring.

It matters where you place the isolator. If you place the isolator exactly in the middle, each shorter spring will equal to each other. You would then be riding using both shorter springs. If you place the isolator 2/3 the way up the oem spring, you would have roughly a 2/3 and 1/3 spring. The 1/3 length oem spring would be much stiffer than the 2/3 spring; and the 2/3 spring would be stiffer than the oem spring. But you should know that you are now riding on the 2/3 spring only. The 1/3 spring is so much stiffer that it doesn't compress until the 2/3 spring has fully compressed since it has the lower effect rate spring.

So the question you should ask, what's the down side. I don't think for this riding crowd it might matter too much. The downside as I see it is how long the 2/3 spring would last in terms of consistent performance. The 2/3 spring has fewer coils windings to carry the load; cycling up and down and up and down. If you look at the attached pic, you see the difference in spring design. The Eibach [red] spring is designed for consistent performance over a million spring cycles. You can see, there are a lot of coil windings (yielding long life consistence performance), the stiffness is achieved by thicker coil wire. Looking at the oem [black] spring you see a design that has some cost reduction considerations; less coil windings to get you stiffness because they used thinner wire in making their coils. Based on my test, the oem has a spring rate of 315 lb/in and the Eibach 550 lb/in (advertised, I found them to be closer to 515 lb/in). Since the 515 lb/in rate has worked well for me (205 lb with no riding gear), I would guess most riders will place the isolator close to the middle, perhaps making a 2/5 and 3/5 spring or (if you are heavier) maybe a 1/2 and 1/2 spring. I think you can see you would be riding on a fewer number of coil windings than the oem configuration. The shorter spring will just end up getting weak after many number of spring cycles. I think you will find after a period of time, you will need to move the isolator to a different location on the oem spring. If you were riding on a 2/3 spring, you might have to later run a 3/5 spring (shorter is stiffer). Eventually you end at a 1/2 spring. If you start with a 1/2 spring, then you don't have the ability to adjust, you just have to get another oem spring after while.

The question is how long does it take to wear out the shorter spring that you have to make adjustments... I'd say it depends on how many miles you ride a year, how long you own the bike, and how heavy you load up the bike. The spring may last long enough that this is a cost effective way to solve the stiffness problem because almost all riders can install this devise vs. put in a proper set of springs to do the job. In fact, this would be easier to put on than the upper shock relocators or after market shocks.

We await your follow up posting telling us more about the coil isolator... :bowdown:

Jerry

 

[PMK]

Doc,

I'll take a guess - PK, you correct me if I'm off base.

The isolator is effectively making the oem spring into 2 separate springs. You do this by inserting a devise between 2 coil windings of the spring and this devise locks the distance between these two coil windings so it doesn't allow these coils to compress. By reducing the effective length of the oem spring, the 2 new shorter springs will each be stiffer than the oem spring.

It matters where you place the isolator. If you place the isolator exactly in the middle, each shorter spring will equal to each other. You would then be riding using both shorter springs. If you place the isolator 2/3 the way up the oem spring, you would have roughly a 2/3 and 1/3 spring. The 1/3 length oem spring would be much stiffer than the 2/3 spring; and the 2/3 spring would be stiffer than the oem spring. But you should know that you are now riding on the 2/3 spring only. The 1/3 spring is so much stiffer that it doesn't compress until the 2/3 spring has fully compressed since it has the lower effect rate spring.

So the question you should ask, what's the down side. I don't think for this riding crowd it might matter too much. The downside as I see it is how long the 2/3 spring would last in terms of consistent performance. The 2/3 spring has fewer coils windings to carry the load; cycling up and down and up and down. If you look at the attached pic, you see the difference in spring design. The Eibach [red] spring is designed for consistent performance over a million spring cycles. You can see, there are a lot of coil windings (yielding long life consistence performance), the stiffness is achieved by thicker coil wire. Looking at the oem [black] spring you see a design that has some cost reduction considerations; less coil windings to get you stiffness because they used thinner wire in making their coils. Based on my test, the oem has a spring rate of 315 lb/in and the Eibach 550 lb/in (advertised, I found them to be closer to 515 lb/in). Since the 515 lb/in rate has worked well for me (205 lb with no riding gear), I would guess most riders will place the isolator close to the middle, perhaps making a 2/5 and 3/5 spring or (if you are heavier) maybe a 1/2 and 1/2 spring. I think you can see you would be riding on a fewer number of coil windings than the oem configuration. The shorter spring will just end up getting weak after many number of spring cycles. I think you will find after a period of time, you will need to move the isolator to a different location on the oem spring. If you were riding on a 2/3 spring, you might have to later run a 3/5 spring (shorter is stiffer). Eventually you end at a 1/2 spring. If you start with a 1/2 spring, then you don't have the ability to adjust, you just have to get another oem spring after while.

The question is how long does it take to wear out the shorter spring that you have to make adjustments... I'd say it depends on how many miles you ride a year, how long you own the bike, and how heavy you load up the bike. The spring may last long enough that this is a cost effective way to solve the stiffness problem because almost all riders can install this devise vs. put in a proper set of springs to do the job. In fact, this would be easier to put on than the upper shock relocators or after market shocks.

We await your follow up posting telling us more about the coil isolator... :bowdown:

Jerry

Jerry, I have done a lot of suspension work and on paper your post sounds legit, but honestly I have never tested it. I just keep it simpler. It is one spring, wire dia is known, active coils are known, and adding a rubber or other means to remove an active coil changes one spring.

Honestly, your post may work but it seems it would be drastic and unpredictable. Also, the setup would need to be really far off.

There probably is a paper somewhere about spring rubbers that suports what you posted but I have never heard or read about the rubbers position making a dual rate spring.

The rubber can add progression based on the rubber (or whatever materials) durometer rating.

If BRP is now offering spring rubbers specifically for Spyders, then they should have a chart or similar to know what works for what payload.

PK

 

[Roadster Renovations]

Some observations I have made on my mod.
Depending on the position the isolator is placed will determine how much dampening that one coil will actually have. Close to the top coil, middle, or bottom, for the top and bottom, being closer to the first coil or farther away will partially stiffen that coil by eliminating part of it's movement. A more aggressive position would be to place 2 or 3 spaced out evenly to eliminate that coil section. For myself, I am happy with the trade-off of having a slightly (very slight) harder ride in order to get better cornering and more control. If I could say one thing about this mod is that it has "tighten-up" the frontend. Response is much more crisp. Based upon rider weight and 1 or 2 up, rider style, will determine how much stiffening is needed.
The shocks have nothing to do with preload unless they are air or gas shocks. All they are designed to do is slow down the compression or expansion of the spring and keep it from oscillating (moving up and down like a jack in the box). The RT has good shocks. It's the springs that are inadequate. I won't spend $800+ dollars to fix a problem that these are able to.

 

[Lamonster]

FYI- http://www.spyderlovers.com/forums/showthread.php?28897-SpyderLovers-Supporting-Vendors