Boo hoo.
There is no evidence or actual proof that suggests the bmw fork is better than what is coming on the 15 R1 base and/or M.
By your logic you should really be throwing a fit about the fact that the front calipers lost a piston. That's right, they went from 6 pots down to four again.
Why not complain about the engineers using a more over the top bracing with the swingarm instead of the "upside down" swingarm used on the 14 R1 and M1?

If bigger was actually better, why stop at 48mm? Why not go to 49mm or 50mm?
Do you have any idea how many times ohlins has braced/stiffened their superbike forks only to reduce it the next year?

Please stop complaining about something you know nothing about.

 

But what do you really think?

 

Ohlins 30mm cartridge<Ohlins 25mm cartridge. Bigger is not always better

 

Is that what your gf tells you to make you feel better?

 

you can adjust stiffness on the KYB forks on the '15 R1, in the grand scheme of things, where exactly is your research for said design, implementation and how do
you arrive at a conclusion where 5mm here or there would make such a difference in any one particular design... its very tough to argue points in pro vs con when
there is no data involved, these forks were in fact designed from the start by kyb/yamaha, and it seems Kawi believed it was good enough to don the H2 with it,
cant be too shaby, lets wait and see what cartridges look like... :dunno


:70:

 

I'm confused by your comment. When you say "stiffness" are you referring to preload or compression? (or a combination?) yes those can be adjusted. The rigidity or "stiffness" of the outer fork and stanchions can not be adjusted...

 

Brembo has always used 4 Pistons for their flagship calipers. The point that was lost on you (obviously based on your comment) was, (let me spell this out for you, read it slowly) bigger is not always better (as the op was suggesting with his comments in regards to millimetres).

 

The pots are bigger on the flagship caliper. There are just fewer of them :corn. The op never argued there should be more than 2 forks

 

adjustment dial TEN stands for TENSION, or the ability to adjust the stiffness level of the fork itself, i'm unsure how far it goes but at the very least the spring itself and mechanism on the cartridge is not a standard setup..

aftermarket will have to implement this, in some manner, if there are improvements to be made... discussion on F1 sneak peek at the technology confirmed KYB has something special here

The 43mm inverted fork on the kawi is based off the Air-Oil Separate (AOS) cartridge fork on the R1,

KYB uses the technology on their MOTORCROSS RandD if i'm not incorrect, though i'm unsure how much other function applies to the rest of the fork.. either case, the T adjustment
has not been talked about or discussed by anyone as there is little information, my comments come from very early press release material by Yamaha.. further
articles show the suspension is in fact a step forward and has not been utilized on a street bike or production bike as of yet... i'm looking forward to this bit of gear

 

Is it just me or is that fork cap usually sexy, for a fork cap.

 

got my popcorn, draggin' my chair over..... this should be a good show!

 

its funny as that actually received several snicker comments from the usual haterz,... geezus everybody wants something thats clean and elegant!! adjustment dials like compression on current bikes is FUGLY!!

i like the move :thumbup

 

Well that's quite interesting...
Hell, it looks about 100 times better than a rubber boot with wires coming out of it.

 

:yesnod

 

Don't KYB use the "TEN" term in reference to rebound?

 

Yes, it's not uncommon for the rebound to be labeled as Ten(sion) on forks.

It's not a new or special setting, it's just a damping adjustment like it's always been.

 

Perhaps 46mm was tested at the factory and it was determined that with the stock frame (no bracing) the front was too rigid giving negative effects when entering and during cornering. This could very well be the right decision based on overall feel and feedback from the riders, engineers and data resources from GP experience.

Perhaps 46mm will work better with a WSBK frame that is braced and made for super smooth tracks and slick tires. Maybe it sucks ass with a flexy stock frame and DOT's.

The s1000 is certainly not the mark to which others should be judged in terms of chassi and suspension. It is a soulless high HP engine in an "all right" chassi. They sure aren't cleaning up in AMA, BSB, or WSBK...what does that tell you when it comes to "handling" and "suspension"?? Because we ALL f-ing know they have the engine...

 

Perhaps 46mm was tested at the factory and it was determined that with the stock frame (no bracing) the front was too rigid giving negative effects when entering and during cornering. This could very well be the right decision based on overall feel and feedback from the riders, engineers and data resources from GP experience.

This is a point I was going to make.

As an example. Even though it seems like the 06/7 R6 has the same frame as the 08+, there are some changes. The 06/7 was actually a bit too stiff and didn't flex enough to maintain ideal contact when leaned right over. So they actually removed some cross bracing right behind the headstock, to soften the frame up some. They improved the bike's on track behaviour by making things softer/more flexing. So stiffer is not always better when it comes to everything working together in symphony.

 

The 43mm 'tubes' thickness could have also been changed, increasing the strength and stiffness without a larger diameter 'tube' being needed. Rendering this thread useless:dunno

 

Material thickness is less important when determining a tubes strength as is overall diameter, especially when considering strength vs weight!

Regarding my statements that you all find fault with - what I have said is that WSB bikes use 46mm - THAT is a fact!

I have said countless times that I am more interested in a track bike than a road bike.

Lastly, the truth is that none of us can take the 2015 R1 to its' limit without the electronic aids.

 

Making the tube thicker will increase its strength/stiffness, I'm not trying to compare strength vs. weight at all. Just saying a 43mm tube could be made as stiff as a 46mm or 48mm one by being made of thicker material. What I find a fault with, is the second guessing of what the engineers decided this bike needs to have, no more no less.

 

...it doesnt necessarily mean Yamaha is gonna go all out and provide us with a WSBK championship winning bike straight out of the box... its bloody absurd to even suggest this :no :shake

R7......that is all


Lol

 

yeah we all know how great that one did, remind me again how many Harris chassis are still in circulation? i may be wrong :dunno

Civilian R7 models were sold as race only, to team owners and licensed racers. Asking price was $32,000, and Yamaha did not offer a warranty. OEM bikes were heavily restricted, making only 106 hp. YEC offered modification kits that would bump output to 135 hp (Stage 1) or 160 hp (Stage 3).

Right off the bat, R7 cranks failed from a manufacturing flaw. Crank alone was $4500. There was no factory recall, no warranty, and Yamaha had to come out of pocket to replace cranks free of charge. In addition, racers complained that the need for YEC kits made racing the R7 far too expensive. Many R7 models sat in showrooms well past 2002, heavily discounted. The R7 was expensive to produce, and Yamaha lost considerable money on each one

Also in the UK, the Harris Performance R71 was a hand-made frame with the same dimensions as the R7, but with modular mounts to accept an R1 motor. Because Harris made this frame so close to the WSBK switch to 1000cc bikes, not many sold. Asking price was close to $10,000, and they only made 8 total frames.

not entirely on the same level as a production R1 it seems, lets not look at actual power numbers, clearly not on the same level as the new r1 :lol

what are we currently on? stage 5? :hammer:

 

It would have won had Haga's penalty for "hardcore, heavy-duty, supreme performance enhancing" drug use been a bit smaller...(rather than "f%#k you Haga and Yamaha, we're making sure you don't win").

The package was there, yamaha was pissed off and left WSBK.

It's odd that they decided to outfit the bike with some ohlins R&T's rather than the run of the mill R1 kyb's. They could have charged the same and maybe broke even on it.

 

It would have won had Haga's penalty for "hardcore, heavy-duty, supreme performance enhancing" drug use been a tiny bit smaller...

The package was there, yamaha was pissed off and left WSBK.

Last nail in the coffin was Nori Haga's championship loss in 2000 because of a positive drug test for Ephedrine.


all that over an appetite suppressant... :hammer:

 

I was content to let this thread die since I seem to be the only one concerned about this issue. However since shakazulu12 has posted the following points, I will respond.

Just for laughs I want to point out that Ducati won the World Superstock title last year. The standard model Panigales come with 50mm forks, the R version that's used to homogolate for racing has 43mm forks.

Purple', please go inform Ducati they have no idea what they are doing and made their homologation special inferior to the base model. It's a miracle they won anything with that stupid setup!

The Panigale uses a 50mm aluminum slider, i.e. not comparable. Perhaps I should school you in the differences between aluminum and steel, i.e. strength, fatigue resistance, etc.

And yes, the R uses a 43mm Ohlins fork.

World Superstock results for the last five years:

2010 BMW S1000RR 46mm
2011 Ducati 1098R 43mm
2012 BMW S1000RR 46mm
2013 BMW S1000RR 46mm
2014 Ducati 1199 Panigale R 43mm

Also, not sure where you are getting that most GP bikes use 48mm forks. They frequently use forks of all sorts of diameters and even vary them depending on the track due to the flex characteristics. It's not so much about under breaking as it is while they are leaned over at 60 degrees and the forks themselves in addition to the chassis have to flex. Since there is significantly less suspension movement at those lean angles.

If you think that you are telling me something that I am unaware of, you are mistaken. I am aware of the suspension dynamics of a motorcycle.

Regardless, the rules for superstock and many of the superbike series stipulate that bikes must use the stock motorcycle's fork exterior. Therefore motorcycle manufacturers must pick a single fork design that they believe will, on average, be the best design for the bikes' intended use. The main point here is what is the bikes intended use. Are we talking about a road bike or a bike designed to win world superstock? As I stated at the beginning of this thread, I am interested in a bike that is designed to win world superstock. If that is not your interest, please forget this thread and start a thread about something that you care about.

And yes, bikes have won with 43mm forks. My thinking is that if superbikes typically use 46mm forks, 46mm forks may be the better choice.

BMW with its' considerable engineering talent apparently thinks so. So, perhaps, it is not such a crazy idea. I gather that many on this site don't like BMW. Regardless, even if you don't like BMWs, we all owe them some gratitude for upping the superbike game with the S1000RR.

For the record, since I have a 2015 R1 on order, I hope that I am wrong. It would be great if 43mm is, in fact, the best choice.

 

Also, not sure where you are getting that most GP bikes use 48mm forks. They frequently use forks of all sorts of diameters and even vary them depending on the track due to the flex characteristics. It's not so much about under breaking as it is while they are leaned over at 60 degrees and the forks themselves in addition to the chassis have to flex. Since there is significantly less suspension movement at those lean angles.

after world war two aeronautical engineers had very little do do without the demand of war planes, most of them went into the motorycle industry and began to build bikes,

you're not always riding perfectly straight up on two wheels, there's much more going on than the human eye can appreciate... :yesnod

:music487:

Where do they find these idiots tuning GP suspensions?!?!?!

walmart :fact

 

Don't come on here spouting facts and common sense, it won't get you too far :crash

 

"Bigger is better" is already a known falacy, yet you seem to be running with it as truth. Sure, BMW chooses to use 46mm, you seem to by implying the sole reason they won a WSSTK title is because of the forks. Let's go ahead and just ignore the chassis, engine, team or the rider.

all needful things it would seem :dunno

it is the choice of all of the manufacturers in WSB. That is what they choose!

ummhhh... read above, you're missing some very key elements in your argument; you cannot take the rest of the package out of the equation.

even when it comes to what they 'chose to use or why'... :dunno

 

I highly doubt it, just from this quote:

"The Panigale uses a 50mm aluminum slider, i.e. not comparable. Perhaps I should school you in the differences between aluminum and steel, i.e. strength, fatigue resistance, etc."

Either that or he's being disingenuous in order to try and "win" a loosing argument. If he went by his original premise, then the 50mm marzocchi is the best fork made right now, but Ducati just wasn't smart enough to put it on the R.

 

Then why not buy the BMW?:dunno

 

I will have no problem railing on those puny 43mm forks.

 

TRACK

Again, talking about WSB bikes that are allowed to run whichever fork they want. Not the other superbike series that are restricted to their stock fork exteriors.

Re the 46mm slider, it is simply my observation that many teams use the $13,000 Ohlins superbike fork that uses a 46mm slider. So, a fork using a 46mm slider and a TTX25 cartridge becomes a "poor man's" Ohlins FGR 300. Why is 46mm better? Why don't you ask the teams that use them?

Obviously we are talking about compromises and tradeoffs here. A superstock bike is restricted to using its' stock fork exterior. You can't change the fork exterior to match the requirements of a given track. And, also obviously the size and flexibility of the fork must be matched to the frame.

Regardless, as far as I know, the majority of the WSB bikes use a 46mm slider (Ohlins FGR). Do you have any statistics to the contrary?

 

Why didn't they put Brembo monoblocks and carbon brakes on the thing.
Probably for the same two reasons, cost and they don't work on a street bike.

Most people don't even touch their suspension from the day they buy let alone upgrade the internals, it's built to sell to the populous and to work for the majority, I guess this is what they think fits the bill.

“You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all of the people all of the time”

Besides my Superbike forks are 43mm :lol

 

Deleted my comments, realized this was turning into an argument as opposed to a discussion and some of my comments that were made in jest weren't taken as so.