RC51 Forums banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Any interest? I bought a bike that has a complete front end from an 05 1000RR. The upper triple clamp is a billet IRC. It will come with forks, axle, upper & lower triples, radial calipers, fender and the front wheel w spacers if you want. I will also sell the matching rear wheel. I am putting a set of Marchesinis and Traxxion RC51 forks on the bike so no need for this stuff. Controls, clipons & master cylinders are not included as I need them.
Pricing I was thinking $500 without wheels. $750 with the wheels (no front rotors, you use your stock ones)
Parts are on the bike until this weekend. I have not looked up steering stem bearings but the bearings and races will be included too so you can just bolt everything up and go.
 

Attachments

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,633 Posts
I thought that the CBR front end was way to short to make work, I could be wrong any geometry issues? More pics with the fairings removed maybe?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
SP1 is correct. It is a 2001 model. I'll put the fairing off this weekend and take some more pictures. As far as fitment goes, this will work on SP1 or SP2. I have not checked to see what the geometry comes out to. I will measure rake & trail before I pull it off the bike. The 1000RR forks are shorter (I think 38-40mm) so trail will be reduced. I'll ride the bike tomorrow and give you my opinion of the handling.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
Rode the bike some today and it actually turned slower than my race RC which is expected. I pulled the fairings off and measure trail. It is 110 mm. Trail for SP1 is 101 mm and SP2 is 96 mm. The offset for the 1000RR triples is 30 mm which is the same as the stock RC. I have not looked up rake for the 1000RR, but the rake for the SP1 is 24.3 degrees and SP2 is 23.3. Dry weight for 1000RR is 396 pounds and for SP1 is 441. I suspect 1000RR valving is better.
With all this said, 1000RR forks work fine and can be raised in the trees to get either a stock trail setting or decreased trail. I run 92 mm on my RC race bike with stock rake & offset. I also run more rear ride height by using a dk link and adjusting my Ohlins rear.
It is buyers decision to decide if they will work for them.

***UPDATE*** The extra 10 mm of trail was really bothering me so I remeasured a couple of times. Same result. Then I looked at the front tire and it is a 130/60/17. The taller tire is affecting the trail by adding about 5 mm.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
170 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I'm not Dan Kyle so I will retract that statement. You would know. Mine was just a guess based on Honda's "always improving". Do any of the internal fork parts interchange between 929/954/RC/1000RR?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,240 Posts
I'm not Dan Kyle so I will retract that statement. You would know. Mine was just a guess based on Honda's "always improving". Do any of the internal fork parts interchange between 929/954/RC/1000RR?
I'm not Dan Kyle either, but it won't stop me from telling you how it works :)

Honda's always improving the bottom line is what they are improving. Before new bikes are released the model and its respective spec sheet go before a panel of analysts that trim down the costs by selecting check boxes of what they want or don't want i.e. adjustable preload, rebound compression etc. Obviously in these current times higher end models need those things as basic selling points so they have to find other ways to curb the expense and they do that by making the parts cheaper. The RC51 was the last great sportbike to come out of Honda. Ever since that time 13 years ago Honda as a whole has been plagued with recalls, faulty components, fading paint and the like. The legend of Honda's fit, finish and reliability is just that a legend long set in popular culture and none of it factually exists anymore.

The RC51 forks respond better to a 20mm revalve than any other fork I have ever tested that alone speaks volumes about them. You can take a set of reworked RC51 forks and use the same set for both canyon riding or winning a club racing championship (which has literally been done) as they work that good in all conditions. The 20mm revalve in the 1000RR forks was in my opinion a waste of time & money. With the 1000RR a complete cartridge assembly is mandatory or of course a full upgrade to aftermarket forks if you want to have any semblance of feel and feedback let alone compliance from the front end.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,996 Posts
I'm not Dan Kyle either, but it won't stop me from telling you how it works :)

Honda's always improving the bottom line is what they are improving. Before new bikes are released the model and its respective spec sheet go before a panel of analysts that trim down the costs by selecting check boxes of what they want or don't want i.e. adjustable preload, rebound compression etc. Obviously in these current times higher end models need those things as basic selling points so they have to find other ways to curb the expense and they do that by making the parts cheaper. The RC51 was the last great sportbike to come out of Honda. Ever since that time 13 years ago Honda as a whole has been plagued with recalls, faulty components, fading paint and the like. The legend of Honda's fit, finish and reliability is just that a legend long set in popular culture and none of it factually exists anymore.

The RC51 forks respond better to a 20mm revalve than any other fork I have ever tested that alone speaks volumes about them. You can take a set of reworked RC51 forks and use the same set for both canyon riding or winning a club racing championship (which has literally been done) as they work that good in all conditions. The 20mm revalve in the 1000RR forks was in my opinion a waste of time & money. With the 1000RR a complete cartridge assembly is mandatory or of course a full upgrade to aftermarket forks if you want to have any semblance of feel and feedback let alone compliance from the front end.
I'd venture to say the same when it comes to 4 wheels and Toyota. I've been a die hard Toyota owner since I had one as my first car. I've gone through multiple trucks and 4runners of the 80's and 90's vintage, and all of them were better built than the 2008 Corolla my wife has and the 2005 4runner I have. My wife's car has had something like 3 or 4 recalls on it, and everything feels cheap as hell compared to the 91 corolla I had years ago. Sure, the new cars look nicer and have more bells and whistles, but build (and engineering/design) quality has gone down in the name of increased profits.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,481 Posts
Don't know about today's cars, but I had a Datsun 521 pickup (looked like a 510 on the front) when I was in high school, and that L16 engine was incredibly durable.

I ran for two weeks with essentially no rod bearing on #2 cylinder.
Engine clacked all over the place. I thought it was due to excessive piston clearance.
When I finally torn the engine down and saw what was left of the bearing shell, plus the glitter of what used to bearing shell, I knew my crankshaft was toast.

But despite my best attempts, the crank looked perfect. Likewise the rod.
I even took it to a machine shop to check the crank and rod with a micrometer.
They couldn't find any mark on either. Not a scratch.
So I just cleaned all the metal particles out of the block, put a new rod bearing in, and off I went.

I used to routinely cruise in 3rd at 7500 RPM. And it had a 122 MPH top end, which I found when I drove to Chicago with my foot planted to the floor for practically the whole distance with an average speed of 98 MPH.

Prior to that, at the drag strip, I pulled a 14.92 at 95 MPH in the quarter.
And never got into 4th gear.
Came off the line at 8000 RPM in 1st, then shifted at 7500 RPM for 2nd and 3rd.
I had folks ask me what I had in the engine bay, and I told them a 1.6 liter 4 cylinder, and they would "no way". And then I'd show them.

Of course it wasn't stock. It had Weber carbs, a set of BRE (Datsun racing) headers, and that was it.
The Webers and the headers just woke that engine right up. I later installed a set of 11.5:1 pistons, but the engine lost power probably due to valve shrouding.

I loved that truck. It was the perfect vehicle for a young gearhead in high school.
Hauled my Kawasaki F5 Bighorn dirt bike all over the place.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,996 Posts
Holy thread revival.

I miss the simplicity of my old '87 4Runner. Lots more room in the engine compartment and less emissions crap.

I put a rod through the side of the block being a stupid 18 year old that never checked his oil. The thing sat for about six months until I had the money to have a shop put an engine in it. After sitting for six months, I filled it up with oil, jump started it and drove it about 10 miles to the shop. Another dumb move as I'm sure it made quite the mess on the way there. It made quite a bit of racket but just kept going.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,616 Posts
Old technology can be better quality. By choice as a daily family car we drive a 22 year old (but much modernised - for luxury ;)) 3 litre turbo Diesel E-class mercedes. It's in perfect condition despite having 192,000km. I intend to drive it for another 10-20 years.
I'd be willing to bet good money that a modern MB won't so easily still run perfectly when the same age, yet alone when it's 30-40 years old!

We also have a 15 year old Toyota 4WD Turbo Diesel people carrier (But that's mainly for carrying our dog or going on winter snow sports trips).
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top