How could a fork spring be reciprocating mass ??? Like ringer said about the oil level, slightest humanly perceptible difference. You always want any weight as low as possible on a bike to make it less top heavy. Tighter (heavier) end of coils down should be less top heavy.
-
1983 GS1100E, 1983 CB1100F, 1991 GSX1100G, 1996 Kaw. ZL600 Eliminator, 1999 Bandit 1200S, 2005 Bandit 1200S, 2000 Kaw. ZRX 1100 -
Tighter wound end at the TOP.Mikuni Viton Choke Plunger Seat Renewal.
VITON Choke plunger seals .KAWASAKI Z1,Z900,Z650,Z1000,Z1R,SUZUKI GS1000,GSXR,RF | eBay
Air Corrector Jets for Mikuni VM 24, 26 and 28mm carbs .
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/254380193...84.m1555.l2649
sigpicComment
-
It's a 2 year old thread, but what the hell...
The correct terms in question are sprung and unsprung mass, not reciprocating weight (as Steve said). The end against the damper rod is 100% unsprung mass, the end against the fork cap is 100% sprung mass. All the coils in between are some combination of unsprung/sprung mass. With a straight rate spring I think the distribution would be linear along the length of the spring, but with a progressive spring it won't be.
From the standpoint of minimizing unsprung mass you want the close coils at the top. I doubt anyone could tell the difference either way on heavy, flexible, softly sprung bikes like our GS's.
MarkComment
Comment