Kawasaki Ninja ZX-6R Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi guys

New member here from the uk, recently got a ZX6RR 03-04 track bike. I'll no doubt be popping up with daft questions from time to time. ;)

firstly I've had some issues with the handling and really need some advice... The bike has a number of trick parts, such as magnesium dymag wheels, ohlins fork comp and rebound adjusters, ohlins damper, ohlins shock etc...

Now I've never ridden a bike with lightweight wheels before this, and I've heard they can be very quick turning which is no bad thing. The issue I'm having with mine though is it feels like the front end wants to tuck. It literally wants to fall into corners and not in a remotely progressive manner.

The forks are not dropped through the yokes, but I'm wondering if the shock is the correct length, also there is a spacer on the top shock mount and I'm not sure if that's a standard item or not. I'm totally new to this bike and really like it, but this handling trait is causing me major confidence issues with the front end. Any ideas??

Cheers :)





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
111 Posts
Sounds like you have a beautiful setup, and I'm jealous of your Ohlins :drool:

I'm no expert but I wouldn't immediately worry about the spacer. It sounds like a tuning/adjustment issue more than geometry. What works for one person may not work for the next.

If you can I would take it to a trusted suspension expert at your next track day, or wait until someone smarter chimes in with a good idea :laugh

Seems like your forks may have the compression set too soft for your needs, but don't forget pre-load should be set first! Always a good idea to talk to a pro, but this article has some good info on acquainting yourself
Motorcycle Suspension Set-up
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Yeah, unfortunately the fanciest ohlins gear in the world set up to cock will be no use to anyone :( the best way to describe it is the front wants to tuck. Awful feeling
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Just thought too, with it being an RR it has an adjustable swingarm pivot.... lots of things to be potentially incorrectly setup. As you sag first port of call, suspension service and sag and go from there
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,742 Posts
I'm not sure what the stock geometry is on the RR....perhaps it is in the manual.

But as you already stated start top to bottom mate...check your sag first, then your preload , could be something as simple as a rebound or compression issue. I don't have an RR so I cannot verify if that spacer is "Stock" or someone shimmed yours. Wish I was any help sorry mate :O

Keep us posted though, because I am curious and new to suspension set ups :bigthumb:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Not enough info to diagnose over the internet, but here are some ideas. Dropping the forks in the triple clamps will slow down the steering and add a little stability. From the pics looks like your forks are not flush with the triple clamps...might want to start with that (after verifying sag is correct like the others said.)

do you know what weight rider the bike was previously setup for? Are you close. If not you may need to change springs to get the correct sag settings. Removing the spacer on the rear shock will bring the rear ride height down, which will provide similar results to dropping the forks in the clamps. Does the bike look like it's riding really high in the rear?

Does your feeling of the front wanting to tuck happen at corner entry or mid turn?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Not enough info to diagnose over the internet, but here are some ideas. Dropping the forks in the triple clamps will slow down the steering and add a little stability. From the pics looks like your forks are not flush with the triple clamps...might want to start with that (after verifying sag is correct like the others said.)

do you know what weight rider the bike was previously setup for? Are you close. If not you may need to change springs to get the correct sag settings. Removing the spacer on the rear shock will bring the rear ride height down, which will provide similar results to dropping the forks in the clamps. Does the bike look like it's riding really high in the rear?

Does your feeling of the front wanting to tuck happen at corner entry or mid turn?
Meant level with the actual fork tube, thought that was the norm rather than flush to the fork top cap?

I'm not sure regarding the previous riders weight, I'm going to get the suspension serviced, rider sag and go from there... it's a bastard to ride at the moment so I don't really want to go out on it again without sorting. It's not massively jacked up but feels quite tall. Does anyone know if that spacer is standard?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
Meant level with the actual fork tube, thought that was the norm rather than flush to the fork top cap?
Yes you are right...was just saying you have some room to drop the forks if you need to. Without checking that sag is proper and you are in the ball park with spring rates, all the other stuff will just keep you banging your head against the wall. Get that done first and then see where you are at.

Does anyone know if that spacer is standard?
Well you don't have standard suspension on your bike so it's sort of an irrelevant question.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
Well if the shock is the same length as standard which it should be then it's totally relevant? If it's longer maybe that should've been removed etc...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,259 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,172 Posts
-Front tire? just cuz no mentioned the most obvious possibility

-Check sag

and until those items are checked off........nothing else anyone on the internet can do for you

Geometry on the bike set up for racing, very common to raise the rear by 5-10mm and lower the front 2-5mm on the kawi... which looks to be exactly what they did---doesn't mean it is set up for you though..........go back to point 1 and 2...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
Good info thanks, will have a look through that manual.

Rear ride height wise - the shock doesn't have any length adjustment at the bottom, it's all done at the top mount. That's why I'm interested in knowing whether the spacer should be there or not, I guess I need to measure the shock length too, to be sure it's a direct replacement for the standard one.

What I do know, is that I fitted a 180/60 supercorsa to the rear before riding it, it came to me with a 180/55 supercorsa. That may have exacerbated things but I did it on my old SRAD with no ill effects. It feels a lot more like something is fundamentally set up wong.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,172 Posts
That 180/60 is significantly taller than the aspect ratio would suggest vs that 180/55

but even if they measured exactly true to the numbers, that is 9mm more rear height! That is a huge geometry change
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Hmm. I see they came with a 120/65 too, no one runs 65s that I know. It's fitted with 120/70/17 sc2 front and 180/60/17 sc1 rear.

Possible the change in rear tyre has fucked the geo somewhat?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
I did the whole 180/60 on my old srad and 190 50 to 55 on my old R1 and whilst it sped the turning up it didn't make the bike feel anything like what I have now


The manual was useful - looks like the spacer is standard.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
489 Posts
. That's why I'm interested in knowing whether the spacer should be there or not, I guess I need to measure the shock length too, to be sure it's a direct replacement for the standard one.
.
Why are you so hung up on getting the shock length back to stock....the bike is not stock anymore, so stock length might not be what you need. Alot of aftermarket shocks come with ride height adjusters because it is another variable in the setup that usually needs to be changed from stock. It's like asking what the stock spring rate is and wanting to go back to that with no obvious reason why.

You really should try to contact the previous owner and find out how and for who it was setup for, and then work from there.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,172 Posts
I did the whole 180/60 on my old srad and 190 50 to 55 on my old R1 and whilst it sped the turning up it didn't make the bike feel anything like what I have now


The manual was useful - looks like the spacer is standard.
So??????????

Perhaps the geometry on those bikes was suck ass fucked up wrong! and the tall tire helped...
Perhaps this was set up perfectly until you fucked it up with putting on a different tire?

Find a local suspension person, clearly this is beyond your expertise!
and your illogic and lack of much detail lead me to believe no one on here will be able to help you more than what has been offered.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14 Posts
Discussion Starter #19 (Edited)
It's going for a full suspension check and refurb this week.

There's no fucking way that the change to a 180/60 has done this, it's barely fucking rideable.

Having checked the sag now the front is miles out. Which LOGICALLY explains the tucking sensation and the fact the only time the front feels stable is when I'm on the throttle transferring the weight to the rear as the forks can't cope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
95 Posts
I agree with most that you need to get sag sorted and ensure spring weights are correct.

For info re. geometry, on my 03 636 I have standard front end and 2012 rear shock fitted which is approximately the same length as standard.

I have approx 5mm of fork showing through the top yoke and about 12mm thread showing on the rear ride height adjuster.

Turning wise the bike is flawless imo.
I'm a fast group track day rider and did ok at club racing a few years ago.

Guess what I'm saying is your geometry setup is unlikely to be the cause
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top