• Required reading for all forum users!!!

    Welcome!
    Register to access the full functionality of the GSResources forum. Until you register and activate your account you will not have full forum access, nor will you be able to post or reply to messages.

    A note to new registrants...
    All new forum registrations must be activated via email before you have full access to the forum.

    A Special Note about Email accounts!
    DO NOT SIGN UP USING hotmail, outlook, gmx, sbcglobal, att, bellsouth or email.com. They delete our forum signup emails.

    A note to old forum members...
    I receive numerous requests from people who can no longer log in because their accounts were deleted. As mentioned in the forum FAQ, user accounts are deleted if you haven't logged in for the past 6 months. If you can't log in, then create a new forum account. If you don't get an error message, then check your email account for an activation message. If you get a message stating that the email address is already in use, then your account still exists so follow the instructions in the forum FAQ for resetting your password.

    Have you forgotten your password or have a new email address? Then read the forum FAQ for details on how to reset it.

    Any email requests for "can't log in anymore" problems or "lost my password" problems will be deleted. Read the forum FAQ and follow the instructions there - that's what we have one for...

  • Returning Visitors

    If you are a returning visitor who never received your confirmation email, then odds are your email provider is blockinig emails from our server. The only thing that can be done to get around this is you will have to try creating another forum account using an email address from another domain.

    If you are a returning visitor to the forum and can't log in using your old forum name and password but used to be able to then chances are your account is deleted. Purges of the databases are done regularly. You will have to create a new forum account and you should be all set.

Stupid Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter renorealtors
  • Start date Start date
R

renorealtors

Guest
Restoring a 1982 GS1100E and the parts diagram or manual does not indicate which way the fork springs go in? Does the tighter coils go up or down?? :rolleyes:

43dwGy4m.jpg
 
Down, i think.
Did you try to put it in, IIRC the ID in the windings is different and it fits only one way. I think.
 
Last edited:
Close wound coils up according to my manual.
You will see a lot of people saying that the stiffness doesn't matter which end you compress from and that is true for static loading.
On the road the compression travels up the spring at a finite speed. For certain types of load the top may never know anything happened until it's all over.
The looser the wind the softer the spring. With the loose end down in theory you get a softer rate that hardens up as the compression increases.
That said mine were opposite ways when I took them out. They went back the same way and I can't say I noticed any difference.
 
Last edited:
I figured it was rising rate and it makes sense to have the tight coils on top. Thanks again
 
Restoring a 1982 GS1100E and the parts diagram or manual does not indicate which way the fork springs go in? Does the tighter coils go up or down?? :rolleyes:

43dwGy4m.jpg

You should consider new Sonic fork springs. Great upgrade for $120

I just put them in my 83 gs750ed and a huge difference. I also have them in my Cooley
 
Restoring a 1982 GS1100E and the parts diagram or manual does not indicate which way the fork springs go in? Does the tighter coils go up or down?? :rolleyes:

43dwGy4m.jpg

Opinion and manufacturers are divided on this. My recent set of Wilbers progressives were quite clear about close-wound coils to the top. Other makers say the opposite.
 
The tighter wound side is the softer side of the spring.... that said it doesn’t make a difference which way you put them from a compression point of view; however the tighter coils should be up to reduce reciprocating mass.
 
While "reciprocating mass" might also be technically correct, I have used the term "unsprung weight".
dunno.gif


.

Haha - I knew it sounded odd when I wrote it.... just thought it could be confusing to say springs were unsprung.
 
Hadn't thought about unsprung weight, but that's a good point.

Tighter coils up also slightly reduces the amount that dropping the spring in affects oil level, since there are fewer coils immersed in oil.


I strongly doubt these factors make the slightest humanly perceptible difference. But if there's a right way and a wrong way, might as well do it the right way. And having a "rule" to follow ensures you'll at least be consistent.
 
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.
 
How could a fork spring be reciprocating mass ???

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.


Mark
 
Back
Top