Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
FJR Motorcycle Forums
Technical & Mechanical Problems
Differences between Gen 2 and Gen 1 & 2.5 Clutch Assemblies
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Help Support Yamaha FJR Motorcycle Forum:
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RaYzerman19" data-source="post: 1111759" data-attributes="member: 18388"><p>Naw, I was just testing ya.......... you're right, I am 180 out. And it's true, it will take the same amount of stroke, worn or not. Just re-read post #1 again..... if I understand it right this time, all James is trying to do is change the engagement point such that the stroke with a Gen 1 slave is the same on a Gen II as it is on the Gen I. Well, it is, isn't it? The disengagement point means a lever position of almost or at the handlebar, the starting point is further forward on a Gen I. I'm having difficulty understanding how one would even change that without a larger bore master (which will just raise the effort again). It doesn't matter what the stack of clutch components are, if worn, the rod just gets longer. If design among different years has a different effective rod length, don't matter. So, to me, it seems the Gen I slave on a Gen I strokes longer than a Gen II slave on a Gen II, simply because of the larger bore. Moving the Gen I slave to a Gen II just makes it the exact same as a Gen I bike....... in other words, all you Gen I guys have a longer stroke the whole time....... (and as the old joke goes, the reason the knob is on the end is so you don't whack yourself in the forehead...). There would seem to be no cure for James' issue, unless I'm really missing something.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RaYzerman19, post: 1111759, member: 18388"] Naw, I was just testing ya.......... you're right, I am 180 out. And it's true, it will take the same amount of stroke, worn or not. Just re-read post #1 again..... if I understand it right this time, all James is trying to do is change the engagement point such that the stroke with a Gen 1 slave is the same on a Gen II as it is on the Gen I. Well, it is, isn't it? The disengagement point means a lever position of almost or at the handlebar, the starting point is further forward on a Gen I. I'm having difficulty understanding how one would even change that without a larger bore master (which will just raise the effort again). It doesn't matter what the stack of clutch components are, if worn, the rod just gets longer. If design among different years has a different effective rod length, don't matter. So, to me, it seems the Gen I slave on a Gen I strokes longer than a Gen II slave on a Gen II, simply because of the larger bore. Moving the Gen I slave to a Gen II just makes it the exact same as a Gen I bike....... in other words, all you Gen I guys have a longer stroke the whole time....... (and as the old joke goes, the reason the knob is on the end is so you don't whack yourself in the forehead...). There would seem to be no cure for James' issue, unless I'm really missing something. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
FJR Motorcycle Forums
Technical & Mechanical Problems
Differences between Gen 2 and Gen 1 & 2.5 Clutch Assemblies
Top