The Greatest Rear Suspension was Stolen!

Tim507
Posts
3479
Joined
6/8/2010
Location
Oregon City, OR US
6/18/2026 5:39am

Spent a few hours with Don Richardson in Las Vegas discussing his story and CZ Suspension a few years ago (8 or so). The conversation was quite facinating for sure!!

My CZ build has his suspension parts in them. Also front axel is from a KX250F.

1973 CZ Tim SullivanIMG 20170114 140248 298.jpg?VersionId=QsAL.MyYWq3kfu67Rl5MfvR tW4IMG 20170205 130647 067IMG 20170315 062034 443.jpg?VersionId=H9OMsL0pN GcXz0Ir9UWQzTIMG 20170725 171824 015IMG 20170818 200713 085
5
1
Bearuno
Posts
5345
Joined
6/28/2014
Location
AU
6/18/2026 8:45am Edited Date/Time 6/18/2026 8:51am

Pictures of, purportedly, one of DRs earliest Rod and Rocker rear ends, during a Test on a Husky :

Monoshock 1974 Husky by Don Riochardson inventor of the Full Floater - 1974 in the pits - C%26J FrameMonoshock 1974 Husky by Don Richardson inventor of Full Floater - close up from slight rear - C%26J Frame pic 2 .jpg?VersionId=e91ps44Monoshock 1974 Huskyby Don Richardson - inventor of the Full Floater - semi close up RH side  %282%29 0

Please Note - these pics can be found on the Internet - the theft from 'The Greek'  was perpetrated long ago.

I've got them marked as 1974 - could be wrong, and, certainly, he would have made something before this very  sano Husky, with C&J decals on it.

Of note is the lower shock mount, it's hard to determine if it's on the forward section of the swingarm, or, on a mount directly to the frame or engine mount. I just can't see / don't know enough of the space at the rear of the Husky engine to see if the forward (and relatively high mount) , if on the swingarm, would clear the rear of the cases during it's Arc, downwards - it may not be a 'floating mount'? Though, if it was from 1974, the rear end may not have had much travel, so that mount did not travel through much of an arc? In the Mid 70s, 7" of travel was a lot more than the 3" or 4" of the time, and far from the 12" that things came to be, as an average. 

I've Don's book right by my bed on a shelve - been meaning to re-read it again.

From dim recollection, I don't think he specified exactly what Suzuki changed, to claim it was their design - was it putting the lower shock mount to the swingarm? Or, was it on DRs original design?

I remember the saga of the legal battle between DR and Suzuki - seems every few months, I'd read in AMCN or Revs ( 2 bi weekly papers / mags that came out on opposite 2 weekly schedules), that he'd won his case against Suzuki, thus getting royalties from Suzuki, even  on rear end designs that had nothing to do with the Floater set up, Suzuki having taken to putting 'Full Floater' decals on many of their rear ends - not just RMs etc, but Road Bikes - and then, seeing Suzuki had appealed the verdict, and he would not get the royalties. On and On, the legal battle seemed to go. 

It must have been a Nightmare for him. I believe he did end up with compensation?

I also recall that within the book, he had a section about how Specialized ( I think) had taken his tech, for the 'Brain' System (I think) . Not sure how that ended up.  

I remember  the Best picture I saw of  what was labeled as one of Don's Floater Rear ends, was in a Brit Road Bike Mag - a little pic, that showed a Very Early shot of a Full Floater, with the Lower Upper Rocker / Short Rod set up that was on Works Zooks, before they changed to that set up with the '84 production RMs. It was SO Trick - and, they said it was a pic taken Years before we saw Suzuki's  Production, or Works Lowered Rocker Floaters.

A Clever Man - well, Teenager at the beginning of it all, that seemed to get royally ripped off by 1, or 2 Large corporations. 

I ran an XR / RM 83 Floater hybrid for many years - I've still got the chassis hanging up behind frames / metal / machinery - until metal fatigue Really set in on it, and I went to an '89 CR125 chassis base.

7
Falcon
Posts
12366
Joined
11/16/2011
Location
Menifee, CA US
6/18/2026 8:55am
mxrose3 wrote:
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that...
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that wasn't release in the US also. Notice how the struts on the swingarm are aimed forward instead of straight up and down. This may have been an initial attempt to still use the design without getting in trouble with the law.

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0
1
1
Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 9:21am
mxrose3 wrote:
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that...
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that wasn't release in the US also. Notice how the struts on the swingarm are aimed forward instead of straight up and down. This may have been an initial attempt to still use the design without getting in trouble with the law.

Falcon wrote:
That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were...

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0

Pretty sure the "redesign" using angled arms instead of the usual vertical ones was due to space and size limitations on the mini (needed to get the leverage) - it was already a congested area on the big bikes with everything competing for the same space and still trying to keep the carb aimed straight at the cylinder.

1

The Shop

Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 9:26am

This is what the Full Floater looks like after Honda flips it upside-down and their marketing department gets done naming it -

2004-honda-cb1000-upl100402swingarm100402swingarm.jpg?VersionId=ilw0V8x1l4hDuK.isrenF4HAvrTzTsC
3
Forty
Posts
3058
Joined
7/27/2009
Location
Saint Paul, MN US
6/18/2026 9:44am

Great thread - and who cares how often it comes up - if you were there it's cool to re live the facts and fantasies, if you weren't - then learn something. 

I never owned a RM during those years; I was a total YZ guy - but I remember listening to the RM owners about how magic the rear was in spite of the deficiencies of the rest of the bike - ie fork/brakes.  And for a few years, they were the shit because of this rear suspension.

RM could blow through braking bumps and hold lines without "swap" like no other bike at the time.  Of course, every other manufacturer was scrambling to improve - it was fun from 76 - 85.  

 

You had to be there

 

11
6/18/2026 9:46am
G-man wrote:
Well in my defense it's obvious a LOT of the younger generation of riders did not realize Suzuki DOMINATED the Motocross World at one time. Just...
Well in my defense it's obvious a LOT of the younger generation of riders did not realize Suzuki DOMINATED the Motocross World at one time.
Just saying.......so if it seems like I am boring you, you can go back and engage the Rutledge Wood thread. Laughing

These four stroke riding farmers don’t know shit about real motocross! 

2
2
Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 9:50am
Forty wrote:
Great thread - and who cares how often it comes up - if you were there it's cool to re live the facts and fantasies, if...

Great thread - and who cares how often it comes up - if you were there it's cool to re live the facts and fantasies, if you weren't - then learn something. 

I never owned a RM during those years; I was a total YZ guy - but I remember listening to the RM owners about how magic the rear was in spite of the deficiencies of the rest of the bike - ie fork/brakes.  And for a few years, they were the shit because of this rear suspension.

RM could blow through braking bumps and hold lines without "swap" like no other bike at the time.  Of course, every other manufacturer was scrambling to improve - it was fun from 76 - 85.  

 

You had to be there

 

Spot-on. 👍

I was also a YZ guy at the time but years later came to appreciate the RMs for what they were; so many outstanding system designs on them.

The popular fix in our area for the RM250 forks was a set of the 44mm Fox Forx.

3
mxrose3
Posts
2347
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Delmar, DE US
6/18/2026 10:30am
mxrose3 wrote:
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that...
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that wasn't release in the US also. Notice how the struts on the swingarm are aimed forward instead of straight up and down. This may have been an initial attempt to still use the design without getting in trouble with the law.

Falcon wrote:
That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were...

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0

Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT of the shock instead of behind it.    

Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 1:43pm
mxrose3 wrote:
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that...
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that wasn't release in the US also. Notice how the struts on the swingarm are aimed forward instead of straight up and down. This may have been an initial attempt to still use the design without getting in trouble with the law.

Falcon wrote:
That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were...

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0
mxrose3 wrote:
Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT...

Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT of the shock instead of behind it.    

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

image 3262.png?VersionId=ixldD
5
mxrose3
Posts
2347
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Delmar, DE US
6/18/2026 2:15pm Edited Date/Time 6/18/2026 2:19pm
Falcon wrote:
That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were...

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0
mxrose3 wrote:
Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT...

Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT of the shock instead of behind it.    

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

image 3262.png?VersionId=ixldD

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

skypig
Posts
943
Joined
8/1/2009
Location
Caloundra AU
6/18/2026 2:46pm
IMG 5459 8.jpeg?VersionId=u1ZAQcNLy0LzLK

This bike is in my Man Cave with Dons book on the seat

 

10
Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 3:28pm
mxrose3 wrote:
Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT...

Yep, I just realized that they started that in 1982.   If you look closely at the linkage though, the top pivot mount is in FRONT of the shock instead of behind it.    

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

image 3262.png?VersionId=ixldD
mxrose3 wrote:
Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty...

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

3
Mit12
Posts
2200
Joined
6/23/2014
Location
Lake Havasu City, AZ US
6/18/2026 3:41pm

I raced a 82 and 83 RM125. They handled so good. I could only imagine how dominate that system would work with today’s shock technology! 

4
speedman
Posts
240
Joined
9/11/2010
Location
Houston, TX US
6/18/2026 3:58pm
Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

I remember years ago reading a claim that the reason Kawasaki made the Uni-Trak a falling-rate system was they thought that would help defeat a patent infringement argument (while still appearing to be a technological advance they could market?).

6/18/2026 4:02pm Edited Date/Time 6/18/2026 4:12pm
Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

speedman wrote:
I remember years ago reading a claim that the reason Kawasaki made the Uni-Trak a falling-rate system was they thought that would help defeat a patent...

I remember years ago reading a claim that the reason Kawasaki made the Uni-Trak a falling-rate system was they thought that would help defeat a patent infringement argument (while still appearing to be a technological advance they could market?).

Yes, the original Unitrak design isn't inherently falling rate. That was just the ratio they chose for the crank arm (it was really close to 1:1 curve). 

2
mxrose3
Posts
2347
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Delmar, DE US
6/18/2026 5:11pm
Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

image 3262.png?VersionId=ixldD
mxrose3 wrote:
Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty...

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

actually, the original Uni-Trak (1980-82) had dual arms leading to a single rocker arm.   Pretty sure they changed it to a single dogbone in 1983.   Maybe under legal pressure?

1981 KX125.jpg?VersionId=pqekLJMQJSfo
Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 6:32pm
mxrose3 wrote:
Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty...

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

mxrose3 wrote:
actually, the original Uni-Trak (1980-82) had dual arms leading to a single rocker arm.   Pretty sure they changed it to a single dogbone in 1983...

actually, the original Uni-Trak (1980-82) had dual arms leading to a single rocker arm.   Pretty sure they changed it to a single dogbone in 1983.   Maybe under legal pressure?

1981 KX125.jpg?VersionId=pqekLJMQJSfo

You're right, I had the '81 KX125 and remember it having the 2 rods going to the rocker with a single pivot bolt going through them. Loved that bike, but apparently it wasn't cool (pun intended) to have the last air-cooled 125 when the world had just gone to radiators. For some reason, every time I think of the first generation KXs, I picture the '83s with the single rod (and the SR models from earlier) and blank out on the 2-to-1 design. I'll chalk it to age! 😁

I thought the aluminum pegs that came on it were so cool and wasn't happy when I lost one out practicing one day. The worst part was when I went to the dealership and ordered a new one - when it came in they handed me a black steel one. I told them they must have ordered the wrong one since the KX had silver aluminum pegs. They checked with Kawi and were told they weren't supplying aluminum replacement pegs, just steel ones.

Talk about miffed - I spent the rest of my ownership riding that bike with one silver and one black peg. 😄

2
6/18/2026 9:20pm
This is what the Full Floater looks like after Honda flips it upside-down and their marketing department gets done naming it -

This is what the Full Floater looks like after Honda flips it upside-down and their marketing department gets done naming it -

2004-honda-cb1000-upl100402swingarm100402swingarm.jpg?VersionId=ilw0V8x1l4hDuK.isrenF4HAvrTzTsC

Honda needs to replace that lower pull rod bearing!

2
Village Idiot
Posts
2559
Joined
5/19/2023
Location
MXoN - a term used by newbs, goobs and rubes, PW US
6/18/2026 9:34pm
This is what the Full Floater looks like after Honda flips it upside-down and their marketing department gets done naming it -

This is what the Full Floater looks like after Honda flips it upside-down and their marketing department gets done naming it -

2004-honda-cb1000-upl100402swingarm100402swingarm.jpg?VersionId=ilw0V8x1l4hDuK.isrenF4HAvrTzTsC

Honda needs to replace that lower pull rod bearing!

I was wondering if I was the only one who noticed that wallowed out thing! 😬 😁

 

1
mx_563
Posts
2193
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
CA US
6/18/2026 10:31pm
Bearuno wrote:
Pictures of, purportedly, one of DRs earliest Rod and Rocker rear ends, during a Test on a Husky :Please Note - these pics can be found...

Pictures of, purportedly, one of DRs earliest Rod and Rocker rear ends, during a Test on a Husky :

Monoshock 1974 Husky by Don Riochardson inventor of the Full Floater - 1974 in the pits - C%26J FrameMonoshock 1974 Husky by Don Richardson inventor of Full Floater - close up from slight rear - C%26J Frame pic 2 .jpg?VersionId=e91ps44Monoshock 1974 Huskyby Don Richardson - inventor of the Full Floater - semi close up RH side  %282%29 0

Please Note - these pics can be found on the Internet - the theft from 'The Greek'  was perpetrated long ago.

I've got them marked as 1974 - could be wrong, and, certainly, he would have made something before this very  sano Husky, with C&J decals on it.

Of note is the lower shock mount, it's hard to determine if it's on the forward section of the swingarm, or, on a mount directly to the frame or engine mount. I just can't see / don't know enough of the space at the rear of the Husky engine to see if the forward (and relatively high mount) , if on the swingarm, would clear the rear of the cases during it's Arc, downwards - it may not be a 'floating mount'? Though, if it was from 1974, the rear end may not have had much travel, so that mount did not travel through much of an arc? In the Mid 70s, 7" of travel was a lot more than the 3" or 4" of the time, and far from the 12" that things came to be, as an average. 

I've Don's book right by my bed on a shelve - been meaning to re-read it again.

From dim recollection, I don't think he specified exactly what Suzuki changed, to claim it was their design - was it putting the lower shock mount to the swingarm? Or, was it on DRs original design?

I remember the saga of the legal battle between DR and Suzuki - seems every few months, I'd read in AMCN or Revs ( 2 bi weekly papers / mags that came out on opposite 2 weekly schedules), that he'd won his case against Suzuki, thus getting royalties from Suzuki, even  on rear end designs that had nothing to do with the Floater set up, Suzuki having taken to putting 'Full Floater' decals on many of their rear ends - not just RMs etc, but Road Bikes - and then, seeing Suzuki had appealed the verdict, and he would not get the royalties. On and On, the legal battle seemed to go. 

It must have been a Nightmare for him. I believe he did end up with compensation?

I also recall that within the book, he had a section about how Specialized ( I think) had taken his tech, for the 'Brain' System (I think) . Not sure how that ended up.  

I remember  the Best picture I saw of  what was labeled as one of Don's Floater Rear ends, was in a Brit Road Bike Mag - a little pic, that showed a Very Early shot of a Full Floater, with the Lower Upper Rocker / Short Rod set up that was on Works Zooks, before they changed to that set up with the '84 production RMs. It was SO Trick - and, they said it was a pic taken Years before we saw Suzuki's  Production, or Works Lowered Rocker Floaters.

A Clever Man - well, Teenager at the beginning of it all, that seemed to get royally ripped off by 1, or 2 Large corporations. 

I ran an XR / RM 83 Floater hybrid for many years - I've still got the chassis hanging up behind frames / metal / machinery - until metal fatigue Really set in on it, and I went to an '89 CR125 chassis base.

^^^ Is this at Indian Dunes? ^^^

mxrose3
Posts
2347
Joined
8/17/2006
Location
Delmar, DE US
6/18/2026 11:21pm
You're right, I had the '81 KX125 and remember it having the 2 rods going to the rocker with a single pivot bolt going through them...

You're right, I had the '81 KX125 and remember it having the 2 rods going to the rocker with a single pivot bolt going through them. Loved that bike, but apparently it wasn't cool (pun intended) to have the last air-cooled 125 when the world had just gone to radiators. For some reason, every time I think of the first generation KXs, I picture the '83s with the single rod (and the SR models from earlier) and blank out on the 2-to-1 design. I'll chalk it to age! 😁

I thought the aluminum pegs that came on it were so cool and wasn't happy when I lost one out practicing one day. The worst part was when I went to the dealership and ordered a new one - when it came in they handed me a black steel one. I told them they must have ordered the wrong one since the KX had silver aluminum pegs. They checked with Kawi and were told they weren't supplying aluminum replacement pegs, just steel ones.

Talk about miffed - I spent the rest of my ownership riding that bike with one silver and one black peg. 😄

As a teenager still in high school at the time, I was infatuated with the 80' KX125 when it came out.   Parents weren't dirtbike friendly, so i didn't get a real dirt bike till a few years later, but always wanted one of these.   I was disappointed to hear that the 80' model was slow, but happy to hear the 81' was fast.  

1
Bearuno
Posts
5345
Joined
6/28/2014
Location
AU
6/18/2026 11:40pm Edited Date/Time 6/19/2026 6:26am
mxrose3 wrote:
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that...
It is interesting that in 1983, Suzuki released a different version of the full floater on its RM80. This version was on an enduro bike that wasn't release in the US also. Notice how the struts on the swingarm are aimed forward instead of straight up and down. This may have been an initial attempt to still use the design without getting in trouble with the law.

Falcon wrote:
That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were...

That's interesting. My 1982 model, like the one pictured, had a Full Floater shock with what looks to be the same angles. The connecting arms were steel, instead of aluminum on that '83. 

82 0

This is the TS250X that had a 'Reversed Rocker ' set up, even More severe than the RM80s.

Suzuki TS250X with Reversed Full Floater

Check out how low and far forward the rocker pivot is!

I think there was a 200X, with this system, but, maybe not - you can find pictures of the TS125s with the more normal Full Floater system.

As an aside, from my own ' bodge something up in a panic' history- when at Frasers, I got Phil 'Popgun' Gielis, from ADB on a Cagiva WMX125, for the Australian Four Day Enduro, that was in South Australia. I think it was '85? 

In the 2nd, or was it the last week before it, he / we had a panic about fuel capacity. Would it do some of the wider apart fuel stops / checkpoints? I think they were going to be using some of the route of the 24Hour event, that was a SA staple in the MC scene - it still exists, I think.

I had a squizz at a few bikes in the Multi Brand showroom that was  Frasers at Homebush, at the time,  and saw the TS250X Tank was the only one with the remotest possibility to be able to be made to fit. So, grabbed a Tank and a WMX125, took them home, and ripped into it. Got it to fit, with a fair bit of cutting, forming and welding. A Lot of time involved ( never got paid, never a thankyou even from Frasers - Popgun was appreciative) . Matched up the radiator shrouds  to the TS250X tank, rattle canned the tank to a near Cagiva Red, and, good to go. I don't think it was needed, after all that. It's the sort of 'Project'  I would love to have back with me,  just for the nostalgia, but, it probably ended up in a dumpster in SA. 

4
Motodude
Posts
5253
Joined
2/2/2008
Location
Sydney AU
6/19/2026 5:00am Edited Date/Time 6/19/2026 5:01am

Have all 3 floaters restored, 125,250 & 465. 125 goes like a bullet and tracks better than anything available now.

Pretty sad how that all played out in the end and disappeared. 

3
Gworm
Posts
2755
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
6/19/2026 5:43am Edited Date/Time 6/19/2026 5:52am

An 81 RM125 was my first brand new bike. 

$1425 out the door. 

Sold it 2 years later for $500 to help pay for an 83 CR250. $1800 for that. 

Great times!
 

Edit: 

I’d love to see Carson Brown and KR do a video with the RM 125 they did before and an 81 to compare lap times. 

It would probably surprise a few people. 
 
Edit again:

If someone on here knows CB, tell him he doesn’t have a single hair on his balls if he doesn’t make this happen!

3
e-wa
Posts
174
Joined
12/18/2013
Location
Pasco, WA US
6/19/2026 11:11am
Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

Here's a clearer view of the system with the airbox, etc., removed so you can see the components -

image 3262.png?VersionId=ixldD
mxrose3 wrote:
Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty...

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

Hang on when the frame snapped,  broke 2 of them.

2
Gworm
Posts
2755
Joined
4/5/2017
Location
Monett, MO US
6/19/2026 11:52am
mxrose3 wrote:
Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty...

Suzuki actually might have gotten away with it, if they designed the big bikes like this.     I mean, the original Kawasaki Uni-Trak was pretty close in design also, but the bottom of the shock attached to the frame, and the top linkage part was only a single attachment point from the rods that connected to the swingarm.

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to...

Nor sure what the specific details were that constituted patent infringement, but yes, Kawi's original Uni was a single dogbone with a shock attached directly to the frame at the bottom. The negatives were that it was a falling rate design and frame breakage was common with the system.

e-wa wrote:

Hang on when the frame snapped,  broke 2 of them.

Kawasaki I assume?

1
G-man
Posts
9076
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Mesa, AZ US
6/19/2026 12:53pm
skypig wrote:
This bike is in my Man Cave with Dons book on the seat 
IMG 5459 8.jpeg?VersionId=u1ZAQcNLy0LzLK

This bike is in my Man Cave with Dons book on the seat

 

Oh man that is a great picture and I'm extremely jealous! I wish I still had my 125 but lost it in a garage fire along with a MINT 87 Honda Hurricane and 01 Yam 426. The 426 was replaceable, but the other two were not and I had planned to never sell those bikes in my lifetime.

The RM probably could have been salvaged, as it did not get direct flames. Days later when I went back to my house there was a dumpster and the guys had already thrown it in there. I probably could have had them remove it but I was too distraught with my house and everything I lost in the garage including a car. 

I really regret not keep getting the RM out. 😪

1
G-man
Posts
9076
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Mesa, AZ US
6/19/2026 12:56pm
Bearuno wrote:
Pictures of, purportedly, one of DRs earliest Rod and Rocker rear ends, during a Test on a Husky :Please Note - these pics can be found...

Pictures of, purportedly, one of DRs earliest Rod and Rocker rear ends, during a Test on a Husky :

Monoshock 1974 Husky by Don Riochardson inventor of the Full Floater - 1974 in the pits - C%26J FrameMonoshock 1974 Husky by Don Richardson inventor of Full Floater - close up from slight rear - C%26J Frame pic 2 .jpg?VersionId=e91ps44Monoshock 1974 Huskyby Don Richardson - inventor of the Full Floater - semi close up RH side  %282%29 0

Please Note - these pics can be found on the Internet - the theft from 'The Greek'  was perpetrated long ago.

I've got them marked as 1974 - could be wrong, and, certainly, he would have made something before this very  sano Husky, with C&J decals on it.

Of note is the lower shock mount, it's hard to determine if it's on the forward section of the swingarm, or, on a mount directly to the frame or engine mount. I just can't see / don't know enough of the space at the rear of the Husky engine to see if the forward (and relatively high mount) , if on the swingarm, would clear the rear of the cases during it's Arc, downwards - it may not be a 'floating mount'? Though, if it was from 1974, the rear end may not have had much travel, so that mount did not travel through much of an arc? In the Mid 70s, 7" of travel was a lot more than the 3" or 4" of the time, and far from the 12" that things came to be, as an average. 

I've Don's book right by my bed on a shelve - been meaning to re-read it again.

From dim recollection, I don't think he specified exactly what Suzuki changed, to claim it was their design - was it putting the lower shock mount to the swingarm? Or, was it on DRs original design?

I remember the saga of the legal battle between DR and Suzuki - seems every few months, I'd read in AMCN or Revs ( 2 bi weekly papers / mags that came out on opposite 2 weekly schedules), that he'd won his case against Suzuki, thus getting royalties from Suzuki, even  on rear end designs that had nothing to do with the Floater set up, Suzuki having taken to putting 'Full Floater' decals on many of their rear ends - not just RMs etc, but Road Bikes - and then, seeing Suzuki had appealed the verdict, and he would not get the royalties. On and On, the legal battle seemed to go. 

It must have been a Nightmare for him. I believe he did end up with compensation?

I also recall that within the book, he had a section about how Specialized ( I think) had taken his tech, for the 'Brain' System (I think) . Not sure how that ended up.  

I remember  the Best picture I saw of  what was labeled as one of Don's Floater Rear ends, was in a Brit Road Bike Mag - a little pic, that showed a Very Early shot of a Full Floater, with the Lower Upper Rocker / Short Rod set up that was on Works Zooks, before they changed to that set up with the '84 production RMs. It was SO Trick - and, they said it was a pic taken Years before we saw Suzuki's  Production, or Works Lowered Rocker Floaters.

A Clever Man - well, Teenager at the beginning of it all, that seemed to get royally ripped off by 1, or 2 Large corporations. 

I ran an XR / RM 83 Floater hybrid for many years - I've still got the chassis hanging up behind frames / metal / machinery - until metal fatigue Really set in on it, and I went to an '89 CR125 chassis base.

mx_563 wrote:

^^^ Is this at Indian Dunes? ^^^

No, it's definitely not indian dunes. It might be Carlsbad as they use to have a Suzuki riding school down there. Rolf Tiblin was one of the instructors, one of my buddies attended. 

G-man
Posts
9076
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
Mesa, AZ US
6/19/2026 12:59pm
Bearuno wrote:
This is the TS250X that had a 'Reversed Rocker ' set up, even More severe than the RM80s.Check out how low and far forward the rocker...

This is the TS250X that had a 'Reversed Rocker ' set up, even More severe than the RM80s.

Suzuki TS250X with Reversed Full Floater

Check out how low and far forward the rocker pivot is!

I think there was a 200X, with this system, but, maybe not - you can find pictures of the TS125s with the more normal Full Floater system.

As an aside, from my own ' bodge something up in a panic' history- when at Frasers, I got Phil 'Popgun' Gielis, from ADB on a Cagiva WMX125, for the Australian Four Day Enduro, that was in South Australia. I think it was '85? 

In the 2nd, or was it the last week before it, he / we had a panic about fuel capacity. Would it do some of the wider apart fuel stops / checkpoints? I think they were going to be using some of the route of the 24Hour event, that was a SA staple in the MC scene - it still exists, I think.

I had a squizz at a few bikes in the Multi Brand showroom that was  Frasers at Homebush, at the time,  and saw the TS250X Tank was the only one with the remotest possibility to be able to be made to fit. So, grabbed a Tank and a WMX125, took them home, and ripped into it. Got it to fit, with a fair bit of cutting, forming and welding. A Lot of time involved ( never got paid, never a thankyou even from Frasers - Popgun was appreciative) . Matched up the radiator shrouds  to the TS250X tank, rattle canned the tank to a near Cagiva Red, and, good to go. I don't think it was needed, after all that. It's the sort of 'Project'  I would love to have back with me,  just for the nostalgia, but, it probably ended up in a dumpster in SA. 

Wow, I have never seen that bike! That is crazy the way the rocker arms are slanted so far forward! 😳

1

Post a reply to: The Greatest Rear Suspension was Stolen!

The Latest