Team Suzuki 1986-2012

tblazier
Profile picture for user tblazier
Posts
8780
Joined
7/20/2011
Location
Leesburg, VA US
tblazier
Edited Date/Time 10/14/2019 5:38am


Kehoe 1986
1
|

The Shop

See All »
look out below 7/17/2012 6:18pm
7/17/2012 6:18pm
Remember when triple pinch bolts on the lower triple clamp was the bees knees? Damn im getting old.
aFACEdismembered 7/17/2012 6:20pm
7/17/2012 6:20pm
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??

Pit Row

See All »
Crisp BRAAAP! 7/17/2012 6:21pm
7/17/2012 6:21pm
The jump from 92 to 93 is gigantic, aesthetically speaking. The 92 is so incredibly hideous and the 93 still looks good to me. It's night and day.
look out below 7/17/2012 6:22pm
7/17/2012 6:22pm
aFACEdismembered wrote:
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back...
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??
I think they switched back to inverted due to flex, don't quote me though.
rmpilot
Profile picture for user rmpilot
Posts
776
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Tomah, WI US
rmpilot 7/17/2012 6:24pm
7/17/2012 6:24pm
aFACEdismembered wrote:
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back...
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??
all i can tell is that i have ridden a lot of different bikes and those conventional forks are still the best to me.
look out below 7/17/2012 6:25pm
7/17/2012 6:25pm
Crisp BRAAAP! wrote:
The jump from 92 to 93 is gigantic, aesthetically speaking. The 92 is so incredibly hideous and the 93 still looks good to me. It's night...
The jump from 92 to 93 is gigantic, aesthetically speaking. The 92 is so incredibly hideous and the 93 still looks good to me. It's night and day.
The Rmx250 stayed with that styling untill the discontinued it.
motokiwi
Profile picture for user motokiwi
Posts
2853
Joined
4/2/2008
Location
2t4L, AL US
Fantasy
269th
motokiwi 7/17/2012 6:25pm
7/17/2012 6:25pm
Crisp BRAAAP! wrote:
The jump from 92 to 93 is gigantic, aesthetically speaking. The 92 is so incredibly hideous and the 93 still looks good to me. It's night...
The jump from 92 to 93 is gigantic, aesthetically speaking. The 92 is so incredibly hideous and the 93 still looks good to me. It's night and day.
The jump from 2000 to 2001 is even bigger in my opinion
rmpilot
Profile picture for user rmpilot
Posts
776
Joined
4/8/2010
Location
Tomah, WI US
rmpilot 7/17/2012 6:25pm
7/17/2012 6:25pm
aFACEdismembered wrote:
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back...
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??
look out below wrote:
I think they switched back to inverted due to flex, don't quote me though.
almost all pros with that from what i know. real riders they work better
look out below 7/17/2012 6:28pm
7/17/2012 6:28pm
aFACEdismembered wrote:
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back...
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??
look out below wrote:
I think they switched back to inverted due to flex, don't quote me though.
rmpilot wrote:
almost all pros with that from what i know. real riders they work better
The front number plate/fork gaurd combo still looks rad.
tblazier
Profile picture for user tblazier
Posts
8780
Joined
7/20/2011
Location
Leesburg, VA US
tblazier 7/17/2012 6:28pm
7/17/2012 6:28pm
aFACEdismembered wrote:
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back...
I'm to young to remember. Anyone know the reason for Suzuki switching from conventional forks to upside down in the late 80's only to switch back to conventional forks in the mid 90's and then finally back to upside down again in the late 90's??
The short answer is that everyone switched to USD forks in the late 90's to provide more rigidity for supercross. The only problem was that these early forks were too harsh and many people thought they were actually worse than the conventional forks they replaced. As a result Suzuki came out with 49mm conventional forks in 96. The new Zook forks were 49mm instead of the old 43mm ones and tried to give you the best of both worlds by being stiffer than the old 43's but less harsh than the USD's. They actually worked awesome for everyone but pros who needed the stiffness of the USD's. KTM also tried the same thing in the mid 90's with Marzocchi. In the end, bad PR from the factory team (MC and the factory guys did not like them) and development costs torpedoed the Conventional experiment and everyone went back to USD's.
look out below 7/17/2012 6:31pm
7/17/2012 6:31pm
tblazier wrote:
The short answer is that everyone switched to USD forks in the late 90's to provide more rigidity for supercross. The only problem was that these...
The short answer is that everyone switched to USD forks in the late 90's to provide more rigidity for supercross. The only problem was that these early forks were too harsh and many people thought they were actually worse than the conventional forks they replaced. As a result Suzuki came out with 49mm conventional forks in 96. The new Zook forks were 49mm instead of the old 43mm ones and tried to give you the best of both worlds by being stiffer than the old 43's but less harsh than the USD's. They actually worked awesome for everyone but pros who needed the stiffness of the USD's. KTM also tried the same thing in the mid 90's with Marzocchi. In the end, bad PR from the factory team (MC and the factory guys did not like them) and development costs torpedoed the Conventional experiment and everyone went back to USD's.
So I wonder how good they could make a conventional fork for us mere mortals today with all of the newer tech?

Post a reply to: Team Suzuki 1986-2012