Picture of MC's Zook's Conventional Forks.. Anyone?

thefactorypilot
Edited Date/Time 1/27/2012 7:30pm
Hey guys, I was listen to the Matthes podcast with Ross Maeda and was interested by their conversation about when factories were bouncing back and forth between conventional and inverted forks... I remember that for a time on his Suzuki that MC was running conventional forks in 97... anyone have a pic of those?
|
ocscottie
Profile picture for user ocscottie
Posts
69108
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Redding, CA US
ocscottie 8/20/2010 8:30am
8/20/2010 8:30am
Dammit, just saw a couple pics of them the other day and now i cant seem to find them. Remember all the weird crazy fork braces they were trying with them? there was a brace between the forks right above the front tire, and it had a little short stubby black fender on it, and they would cut the back of the front fender off.

We talked about this not to long ago, maybe someone will dig up some pics, would like to see them again also, especially if we can find a shot of the weird brace dealio.
ocscottie
Profile picture for user ocscottie
Posts
69108
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Redding, CA US
ocscottie 8/20/2010 8:31am
8/20/2010 8:31am
Well there we go, thanks 295.

btw: you really need a new avatar.
ATKpilot99
Profile picture for user ATKpilot99
Posts
9819
Joined
4/13/2010
Location
Lake Geneva, WI US
ATKpilot99 8/20/2010 8:35am
8/20/2010 8:35am
The conventional forks were stock on the RMs starting in 96 . I remember reading MC didn't like them and switched to the inverted fork . I think Suzuki switched back to the inverted fork on production RMs in 99 .

The Shop

See All »
ocscottie
Profile picture for user ocscottie
Posts
69108
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Redding, CA US
ocscottie 8/20/2010 8:37am
8/20/2010 8:37am
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire.

Torco1
Profile picture for user Torco1
Posts
6591
Joined
4/27/2007
Location
Corona, CA US
Torco1 8/20/2010 8:40am
8/20/2010 8:40am
ocscottie wrote:
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire. [img]https://www.ocscottie.com/new/uploads/97-mcgrath2.jpg[/img]
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire.

Was that to keep the pipe from getting all dinged up?
ocscottie
Profile picture for user ocscottie
Posts
69108
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
Redding, CA US
ocscottie 8/20/2010 8:43am
8/20/2010 8:43am
ocscottie wrote:
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire. [img]https://www.ocscottie.com/new/uploads/97-mcgrath2.jpg[/img]
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire.

Torco1 wrote:
Was that to keep the pipe from getting all dinged up?
no, they had a brace inbetween the fork legs to try and stiffen them up, and they hung a little fender from it and cut off the back of the real front fender, probably also helped a little in air flow to the rads.
Torco1
Profile picture for user Torco1
Posts
6591
Joined
4/27/2007
Location
Corona, CA US
Torco1 8/20/2010 8:49am
8/20/2010 8:49am
ocscottie wrote:
no, they had a brace inbetween the fork legs to try and stiffen them up, and they hung a little fender from it and cut off...
no, they had a brace inbetween the fork legs to try and stiffen them up, and they hung a little fender from it and cut off the back of the real front fender, probably also helped a little in air flow to the rads.
Got it, thanks! Cool
thefactorypilot 8/20/2010 8:49am
8/20/2010 8:49am
ocscottie wrote:
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire. [img]https://www.ocscottie.com/new/uploads/97-mcgrath2.jpg[/img]
Here is a pic where you can see the stubby little black front fender right above the front tire.

Torco1 wrote:
Was that to keep the pipe from getting all dinged up?
In the Matthes Podcast with Ross Maeda, Ross said that the biggest thing about the conventional forks was that they didn't have near the rigidity, which relates into where you want to stick the front wheel, as the inverted forks did. As I recall(I was only 16 at the time), that year MC started out with works inverted units and a few races into the season switched to the conventional stuff. He was having all kinds of issues with that bike from chassis to motor and was trying everything to get it sorted out.

Thanks 295 for piosting those pics up, and ocscottie too... and I agree with ocscottie, 295 really needs a new avatar!
Torco1
Profile picture for user Torco1
Posts
6591
Joined
4/27/2007
Location
Corona, CA US
Torco1 8/20/2010 8:53am
8/20/2010 8:53am
Yeah Mx295, what's wrong with you? You need something more like this.....

ATKpilot99
Profile picture for user ATKpilot99
Posts
9819
Joined
4/13/2010
Location
Lake Geneva, WI US
ATKpilot99 8/20/2010 8:54am
8/20/2010 8:54am
I believe he started with the conventionals and later switched to the inverted because he felt the conventionals flexed too much.
Outsider
Profile picture for user Outsider
Posts
10634
Joined
1/29/2009
Location
Huntington Beach, CA US
Outsider 8/20/2010 9:01am
8/20/2010 9:01am
ocscottie wrote:
no, they had a brace inbetween the fork legs to try and stiffen them up, and they hung a little fender from it and cut off...
no, they had a brace inbetween the fork legs to try and stiffen them up, and they hung a little fender from it and cut off the back of the real front fender, probably also helped a little in air flow to the rads.
That fork brace was developed by Scott Summers for his XR600's to reduce flex... not sure if Suzuki copied that or what exactly.
TeamGreen
Profile picture for user TeamGreen
Posts
29082
Joined
11/25/2008
Location
Thru-out, CA US
TeamGreen 8/20/2010 9:06am
8/20/2010 9:06am
Magnesium sliders, Huge Cartridges and it looked to be the direction Suzuki was going in...as stated Zook was runnin' Conventionals on their production bikes...same type of fork on DRZs currently.

Over $1000 for a new Magnesium slider(Lower)!

J'Mac actually liked/knew the inverted Showas from his Hondas (...but, the Super-Huge Conventionals were the "New Thing...).

newmann
Profile picture for user newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
newmann 8/20/2010 9:24am
8/20/2010 9:24am
Did that Suzuki of his (or Albertyn's )used to be on display at Pro-Circuit? Around 2002?
Titan1
Profile picture for user Titan1
Posts
8620
Joined
2/3/2010
Location
Lehi, UT US
Titan1 8/20/2010 9:28am
8/20/2010 9:28am
Since everyone uses "inverted" forks, does that make them "conventional" now days?
Deetsmx
Profile picture for user Deetsmx
Posts
880
Joined
4/21/2008
Location
Visalia, CA US
Deetsmx 8/20/2010 9:34am
8/20/2010 9:34am
I remember those forks were awesome stock. I feel that McGrath was the sole reason Suzuki went back to upside down. I'm sure they did flex too much for SX, but how many people does that really affect.
newmann
Profile picture for user newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
newmann 8/20/2010 10:13am
8/20/2010 10:13am Edited Date/Time 8/20/2010 10:14am
Marketing. Suzuki switched back because everybody HAD to have inverted forks. Kind of like they think everybody needs a four stroke. Most of the major issues with inverted forks had been worked out by that time anyway and everybody saw the bikes as outdated.

About the flexing of forks, they flex just below the lower triple clamp. On a conventional fork, the slider action is basically unaffected and the fork continues to work properly. On a inverted design, if the upper (outer) tube has any flex, it will cause the inner slider to stick. Too flexible, too rigid, too much mid stroke harshness, blah blah blah. Back when Honda first went to inverteds, quite a few racers were robbing front ends off their 87 CR250's because the inverteds sucked so bad.
Kinetic1
Profile picture for user Kinetic1
Posts
2796
Joined
6/4/2009
Location
Gun Lake, MI US
Kinetic1 8/20/2010 10:21am
8/20/2010 10:21am
I loved my 96 RM with the conventional forks. Once I had the suspension revalved it was wonderful the way that bike handled and sucked up everything from big landings to tiny stutter bumps.

Pit Row

See All »
englishman
Profile picture for user englishman
Posts
2604
Joined
3/7/2008
Location
England GB
englishman 8/20/2010 10:24am
8/20/2010 10:24am
He put an old pair of Honda works forks, front wheel & brake on that Suzuki.

He talks about it in his book a little.
Adam43
Profile picture for user Adam43
Posts
3185
Joined
8/16/2006
Location
WF
Adam43 8/20/2010 10:46am
8/20/2010 10:46am
thefactorypilot wrote:
In the Matthes Podcast with Ross Maeda, Ross said that the biggest thing about the conventional forks was that they didn't have near the rigidity, which...
In the Matthes Podcast with Ross Maeda, Ross said that the biggest thing about the conventional forks was that they didn't have near the rigidity, which relates into where you want to stick the front wheel, as the inverted forks did. As I recall(I was only 16 at the time), that year MC started out with works inverted units and a few races into the season switched to the conventional stuff. He was having all kinds of issues with that bike from chassis to motor and was trying everything to get it sorted out.

Thanks 295 for piosting those pics up, and ocscottie too... and I agree with ocscottie, 295 really needs a new avatar!
It was the other way around. He started with the conventionals and switched to upside-downs about halfway through the season. I think Albertyn and LaRocco ran the conventional all year.

They weren't too bad to ride with. Very supple feeling, but you could definitely feel the flex going hard into bowl turns and such. Kind of unnerving.
WhKnuckle
Profile picture for user WhKnuckle
Posts
7327
Joined
7/17/2007
Location
TX US
WhKnuckle 8/20/2010 11:00am
8/20/2010 11:00am
I personally think you can make a better set of conventionals than inverted ones, because one of the most important factors in smooth forks is how much friction - especially static friction - exists between the inner and outer tube. Since conventionals can be built so the fork extends below the axle, you can make the mating surfaces between the inner and outer longer, and the fork components don't have to fit so tightly and still won't be sloppy. You see all the high-end fork sets with all the friction reducing coatings to try to reduce the friction in the tight bushings - if you make the bushings longer, you can reduce the friction by opening up the clearances very slightly, and it'll make a lot of difference.
Crisp BRAAAP! 8/20/2010 5:16pm
8/20/2010 5:16pm
Torco1 wrote:
Yeah Mx295, what's wrong with you? You need something more like this..... [img]http://photos.ramseym.com/pictures/blog/wtf_dude.jpg[/img]
Yeah Mx295, what's wrong with you? You need something more like this.....

Wow, Torco1. I can never un-see that...
newmann
Profile picture for user newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
newmann 8/20/2010 6:07pm
8/20/2010 6:07pm
I still think with the right internals, proper diameter tubes and appropriate overlap that this setup would offer the best of both worlds. Like Suzuki's Full Floater rear suspension, probably too many components to make it affordable for a production bike. One end set up for the light stuff, the other for the big hits. Center tube basically floats. Original design by Showa was ditched and a moto enthusiast in Texas revived the idea. Some say it will never work, but I see a lot of possibilities.






Kent Howerton thinking he could have used these 30 years ago!
FIREfish148
Profile picture for user FIREfish148
Posts
5443
Joined
1/20/2009
Location
Kirkland, WA US
FIREfish148 8/20/2010 6:11pm
8/20/2010 6:11pm
newmann wrote:
I still think with the right internals, proper diameter tubes and appropriate overlap that this setup would offer the best of both worlds. Like Suzuki's Full...
I still think with the right internals, proper diameter tubes and appropriate overlap that this setup would offer the best of both worlds. Like Suzuki's Full Floater rear suspension, probably too many components to make it affordable for a production bike. One end set up for the light stuff, the other for the big hits. Center tube basically floats. Original design by Showa was ditched and a moto enthusiast in Texas revived the idea. Some say it will never work, but I see a lot of possibilities.






Kent Howerton thinking he could have used these 30 years ago!
Wow thats badass. Seems like they would cause a lot of friction though.
queen of spodes 8/20/2010 6:14pm
8/20/2010 6:14pm
moto589 wrote:
How about the new exclusive to Kawasaki Showa Separate Function Fork (SFF).

It will be interesting to see if this becomes the new 'conventional' fork.

http://www.vitalmx.com/features/New-Bike-Season-Kawasaki-KX250F,3067
Didn't Husky have something similar to this in the 80s, with (I think) Marzhoccis having rebound on one side and compression on the other?
newmann
Profile picture for user newmann
Posts
24444
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
US
newmann 8/20/2010 6:27pm
8/20/2010 6:27pm
newmann wrote:
I still think with the right internals, proper diameter tubes and appropriate overlap that this setup would offer the best of both worlds. Like Suzuki's Full...
I still think with the right internals, proper diameter tubes and appropriate overlap that this setup would offer the best of both worlds. Like Suzuki's Full Floater rear suspension, probably too many components to make it affordable for a production bike. One end set up for the light stuff, the other for the big hits. Center tube basically floats. Original design by Showa was ditched and a moto enthusiast in Texas revived the idea. Some say it will never work, but I see a lot of possibilities.






Kent Howerton thinking he could have used these 30 years ago!
FIREfish148 wrote:
Wow thats badass. Seems like they would cause a lot of friction though.
So, you are saying they would compliment a 4 stroke engine perfectly?Smile
teggers
Profile picture for user teggers
Posts
3689
Joined
8/15/2006
Location
Winter Park, FL US
teggers 8/20/2010 6:34pm
8/20/2010 6:34pm
My conventionals on my zook in 97 were the best forks I have ever had.

Post a reply to: Picture of MC's Zook's Conventional Forks.. Anyone?