News:

The simplest way to help GStwin is to use this Amazon link to shop

Main Menu

Rear wheel won't move forward (to adjust chain slack)

Started by tushardr, July 30, 2017, 11:33:32 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

sledge

Quote from: user11235813 on August 07, 2017, 08:03:18 PM
Brilliant Sledge old chap. This has been driving me nuts. I have a laser alignment tool so I know that the chain is definitely aligned but I always find that the plate that covers the end of the swing arm on the calliper side always seems to want to be loose even when everything else is right. I just put new shoes on the back and noticed again the loose plate but when I put the laser tool over the chain, it was in alignment.

But I just want to clarify, when you say the two bolts at each end of the torque arm did you mean each SIDE of the torque arm? Like just the bit where it pivots on the calliper, or did you actually mean each END. Meaning the bolt at the calliper and the other END of the torque arm near the rear brake hose?

Quote from: sledge on July 30, 2017, 01:11:23 PM
You are correct

As well as backing off the adjusters and loosening the nut on the axlebolt you also need to loosen the bolts at each end of the torque arm to allow the rear caliper to move relative to the wheel and disc.

Yes...loosen completely the fastenings at each end of the torque arm.  This will allow the arm to rise or fall as the calliper rotates as it move forward and backward as explained above.


Needless to say.....tighten everything back up when done  :thumb:

sledge

#21
Quote from: gsJack on August 07, 2017, 12:52:23 PM
Quote from: gsJack on July 30, 2017, 09:04:13 PM
With the bike on the center stand I stood behind it holding the grab handle tight with both hands and kicked the tire hard with one foot while standing on the other, worked every time.  Loosened the axle nut but loosening the torque bar was optional.

Worked for me for 180k GS500 miles over 15 years of GS500 riding.

Quote from: sledge on August 07, 2017, 10:07:08 AM.................Older and wiser.....as they say.

Gotta agree with that one Sledge, how old are you?


Not as old as you Jack........as to wiser???
I guess my Jury is still out on that one.

Your answer to everything always seems to be something like..."I did it that way for 101 years and a 1,000,001 miles and never had a problem"


To me thats like saying "I smoked 60 full strength cigs' every day for 70 years and never developed lung cancer.

Well lucky you say I........but what about the ones that did?


1018cc

I'd guess an actual Suzuki bike mechanic who works for a stealership that quote jobs on how much time they'd take would bump the tyre with a mallet. Less bolts to undo and torque up = quicker.

Hitting / kicking the rear wheel works for me with the axle nut and adjusters backed off.

Sent from my F8132 using Tapatalk


sledge

Works for me too.......but I still wouldn't want to do it  :dunno_black:

Watcher

#24
Quote from: sledge on August 08, 2017, 10:51:49 AM
""No.  Because in this image the yellow circle is a HINGE which connects the top of the calliper""

To allow the torque arm to raise as the calliper rotates it must be loosed at both ends because it needs to pivot at BOTH ends to allow this movement.  Even with a hinge on the calliper side as suggested no free movement of the axle bolt can take place unless there is also a hinge on the other side of the toque arm allowing it to rise, or indeed fall if the axle bolt moves backwards.

Which changes absolutely nothing operationally to our current task, which is, move the rear wheel inward.

So long as both hinges are not tightened down, which they shouldn't be, the caliper is free to rotate as the axle moves in and out.  IIRC both sides of that torque arm use a castle-nut type arrangement.  Castle-nuts are designed to keep a nut from from backing off on it's own.  This is because of the fact that the nut in the particular application can't be tight, typically because it needs to be a little loose to allow the part being held to rotate.
So, we have a caliper that's attached to a mount which is then attached to a bolt that is designed to slide on a track (axle), and the other end of the caliper is on a hinged arrangement to not only keep it in place but also allow it to rotate as the mount slides along the track.  This hinged arrangement is assembled with a bolt/nut style that is designed to allow play for proper operation.

So unless the end-user tightened down those bolts to keep the hinges of the torque arm from being hinges, I see no reason why striking the wheel to move it inward would have ANY damaging effect on the caliper whatsoever.

"Simple mechanics, my friend."
"The point of a journey is not to arrive..."

-Neil Peart

sledge

So you are saying........ there would be no impact forces transmitted through the tyre, then through the tyre into the wheel, then from the wheel into the axle bolt, then onto the calliper bracket the axle bolt passes through,  then into he calliper.....which although allowed to pivot  is held rigidly by the torque arm?

Realy?

If the calliper moves when you hit the wheel its absorbing forces from somewhere.

Watcher

#26
Quote from: sledge on August 08, 2017, 02:31:21 PM
If the calliper moves when you hit the wheel its absorbing forces from somewhere.

Any excess force applied to the wheel will be primarily absorbed by the swingarm when the axle meets resistance from the adjuster plates.  Force moves linearly, it won't travel up the mounting bracket and into the caliper with enough energy to damage anything.

Think of it in terms of physiology.  If the frame end of the torque bar is your elbow, the torque bar itself is your forearm, and the caliper end of the torque bar is your wrist, then the caliper can be seen as your hand and the mounting bracket can be seen as something you are holding.  Lets say it's a hammer.
When you swing that hammer and strike something, how much does it hurt your hand?  Your wrist?  Your elbow?  If it did you'd get one, maybe a handful of good swings in and you'd be forced to stop from pain or broken bones or something.  But no.  Look at blacksmiths.  They'll do hundreds even thousands of strikes on a single piece of metal without injury or anything, while any one of those swings has more than enough energy to completely shatter a hand.
Why?
Because the bulk of the force being delivered is in line with the head of the hammer, and any energy that is transferred through the handle and into the hand, wrist, arm, or elbow, is very minimal.

So is the caliper experiencing a force exerted upon it?
Yes.
Is that force anywhere near enough to actually damage anything?
No.

Also keeping in mind that since your striking an air-filled rubber tire, a LOT of that force is being reflected back into your striking implement.  Hitting the tire to move the axle forward puts much less force into the axle as, say, using a long rod to strike the axle directly, which is something I would not recommend.





Here's a video from RevZilla about adjusting chain slack, and at 7:07 he is basically offering the same advice I am to free up an axle that wants to stay in place.

"The point of a journey is not to arrive..."

-Neil Peart

gsJack

Quote from: sledge on August 08, 2017, 12:08:58 PM..........................Your answer to everything always seems to be something like..."I did it that way for 101 years and a 1,000,001 miles and never had a problem"


To me thats like saying "I smoked 60 full strength cigs' every day for 70 years and never developed lung cancer.

Well lucky you say I........but what about the ones that did?

Well I'm one of those that did, after many years of smoking 3 packs a day I quit smoking about 30 years ago and then about 3 years ago they found a cancer in my right lung and blew it away with their big ray gun down at the Cleveland Clinic.  Could be I'm still good for another 101 years?

When I say something worked for me for miles and years I think it means more than just saying it worked for me once.   :dunno_black:   How many miles have you ridden a GS500?
407,400 miles in 30 years for 13,580 miles/year average.  Started riding 7/21/84 and hung up helmet 8/31/14.

sledge

#28
Back to this mileage thing again eh?

To be honest, not as many miles as you.........but how many Gs5s have you owned or have passed through your hands? 2 or 3?

If you want to turn it into a willy-waving contest..............

I lost count around 44

The total amount of bikes I have owned bought and sold in the last 30 years?........maybe 275  :dunno_black:

gsJack

407,400 miles in 30 years for 13,580 miles/year average.  Started riding 7/21/84 and hung up helmet 8/31/14.

user11235813

Sledge is right, and everyone else is wrong. Deal with it.

For as long as I've had my GS which is about two years now, the right adjusting plate on the calliper side has been impossible to get sitting nice and tight against the swing arm. I use a laser alignment tool for adjusting my rear chain, so I know for certain when my chain is in proper alignment.

After using the kick the tyre method the last time I adjusted the chain, I managed to finagle the calliper side plate so it was sort of tight, however after a while it gradually returns to be as loose as a pair of nuns knickers, see this video https://youtu.be/R13XZg00uCg even though the chain is still in alignment.

Today, I backed off the torque link nuts (and axle nut obviously) and with just just a moderate punch on the back tyre with my fist the plate immediately sat flush and tight against the swing arm. Loosening the torque arm bolts is obviously the correct method.

I am thankful that Sledge does not abandon this forum due to some people who have very delicate and highly tuned ability to be easily annoyed by people who know what they are talking about and express their knowledge with the confidence of someone who does in fact know what they are talking about.

In light of that I think I'm entitled to refer to the two comments below that are expressing the same sentiment, they are both by @qcbaker and they are in separate posts. To qcbaker, I thank sweet baby jesus that sledge is on this forum and if you are upset by an opinion that is expressed without false humility then I suggest that it could very well be you and not Sledge who is "an enormous tool"

But it is possible to disagree with someone without being so pretentious and holier-than-thou.

Is it even physically possible for you to disagree with someone without being an enormous tool?

ajensen

If it works, do it. There are often many ways to accomplish the same task, so I try not to be dogmatic. I have learned a lot from this forum. Sometimes I disagree with people, and they disagree with me. However, I do not discount what anyone says. I, too, am happy y'all, including Sledge, are on this forum.

yamahonkawazuki

some maay disagree with whoever. most let it sliide, some do not. thats ok. i disagree with many people, including some on this board.. but thats okay. they know what they know, and so do i. but we all try our best to keep it rather civil here.
Aaron
Jan 14 2010 0310 I miss you mom
Vielen dank Patrick. Vielen dank
".
A proud Mormon
"if you come in with the bottom of your cast black,
neither one of us will be happy"- Alan Silverman MD

user11235813

@yamahonkawazuki, @ajensen,

Yes, I hear you both good and sensible advice. However I felt it was time to defend Sledge, not from what he says, not from the point of the argument, not from whether someone disagrees, but from a far more metaphysical standpoint which is close to my heart. The complaint, or abuse that is directed at Sledge always seems to be that he is not humble enough.

Let me repeat that. Sledge is often criticised for not being humble enough.

Let that sink in. Because of this, the abuse he receives is more subtle and it is often left undefended, and I for one am sick of it. This is a subject that is dear to my heart because I myself have developed a body of work that, if I may say so is brilliant, but no matter how humble and self effacing I am when presenting it to academics who have not seen the obvious, it does not work. Therefore I prefer to present my knowledge with the confidence I have that comes from building it oneself and applying it in my own life for 30 years. I give straightforward advice to those friends around me when I see them walking headlong into horror, but I am always ignored. Every single one of the people to whom I have given advice which has been ignored, soon find themselves divorced, and angry.

The point I wanted to make is that my knowledge itself is never criticised, the most common criticism I get it that I am not humble enough, or that I am 'arrogant'. I will never understand this. </rant>

qcbaker

#34
Quote from: user11235813 on August 17, 2017, 06:40:21 PM
Sledge is right, and everyone else is wrong. Deal with it.

In light of that I think I'm entitled to refer to the two comments below that are expressing the same sentiment, they are both by @qcbaker and they are in separate posts. To qcbaker, I thank sweet baby jesus that sledge is on this forum and if you are upset by an opinion that is expressed without false humility then I suggest that it could very well be you and not Sledge who is "an enormous tool"

But it is possible to disagree with someone without being so pretentious and holier-than-thou.

Is it even physically possible for you to disagree with someone without being an enormous tool?


First of all, sledge being right doesn't necessarily mean "everyone else is wrong" in this situation. There can be more than one solution to a problem. Secondly, I wasn't saying the information sledge was giving was incorrect. Like I said in my previous post, I even kind of agreed with him. I was simply calling him out for his arrogance and dismissive behavior.

If sledge had left this line: "No tell you what........don't bother answering. Every so often someone in here comes out with a comment that's mind blowingly irresponsible, looks like it's your turn today!" out of his original reply, I wouldn't have even said anything. This comment serves no purpose other than to be insulting and dismissive. It adds literally nothing to the discussion of the issue at hand. It's irrelevant, pretentious, and rather than refuting of any of Watcher's arguments, it simply attempts to dismiss him, which is why I have a problem with it.

Quote from: user11235813 on August 17, 2017, 08:54:56 PM
@yamahonkawazuki, @ajensen,

Yes, I hear you both good and sensible advice. However I felt it was time to defend Sledge, not from what he says, not from the point of the argument, not from whether someone disagrees, but from a far more metaphysical standpoint which is close to my heart. The complaint, or abuse that is directed at Sledge always seems to be that he is not humble enough.

Let me repeat that. Sledge is often criticised for not being humble enough.

Let that sink in. Because of this, the abuse he receives is more subtle and it is often left undefended, and I for one am sick of it. This is a subject that is dear to my heart because I myself have developed a body of work that, if I may say so is brilliant, but no matter how humble and self effacing I am when presenting it to academics who have not seen the obvious, it does not work. Therefore I prefer to present my knowledge with the confidence I have that comes from building it oneself and applying it in my own life for 30 years. I give straightforward advice to those friends around me when I see them walking headlong into horror, but I am always ignored. Every single one of the people to whom I have given advice which has been ignored, soon find themselves divorced, and angry.

The point I wanted to make is that my knowledge itself is never criticised, the most common criticism I get it that I am not humble enough, or that I am 'arrogant'. I will never understand this. </rant>

Wow, you really are arrogant. I don't mean that as an insult, just a statement of fact.

Anyway, calling someone out for being arrogant is a perfectly valid criticism. The "abuse" (lol, really?) sledge receives is left undefended because it is basically indefensible. Your main "defense" here is "its okay to be an @$$hole as long as you're right" which is simply not true. Consider the following two scenarios:

Scenario 1:

Person 1: If A is true, then B is true. B IS true, so A must also be true, right?
Person 2: Not necessarily, have you considered that you may be affirming the consequent here? B being true doesn't necessarily mean that A must also be true, we would need more information to infer the veracity of A in this situation.

Scenario 2:

Person 1: If A is true, then B is true. B IS true, so A must also be true, right?
Person 2: Definitely not, you're affirming the consequent. Have you ever even heard of a logical fallacy? No tell you what........don't bother answering. Every so often someone in here comes out with a comment that's mind blowingly irresponsible, looks like it's your turn today!

Which one of these two scenarios do you think is more likely to 1.) change person 1's mind, and 2.) keep discourse between person 1 and person 2 civil? Just because person 2 is right in both scenarios doesn't mean they're immune from criticism. You don't need to be rude to be right. Civil discourse is always a better way to get your point across than slinging insults and belittling the other person's intelligence. I welcome sledge's input in any thread, he usually has pretty good technical advice. But, I would prefer he give that input in a constructive, polite manner, which he often does not. That is a perfectly valid criticism.

You said you "will never understand" why people criticize other people (like you and sledge) for being arrogant, even if their advice is good. I hope this post helps you understand why many people (myself included) do so.

Also, can you PM me a link to your "brilliant" body of work? I'd be very interested to read it.

mr72

Wow.

BTW this forum does have an "ignore" feature, so you can choose not to view the posts of a particular user if you like. I confess there is more than one user on my "ignore" list and my experience on this forum is improved because of it, even though I may miss out on what would otherwise be useful information.

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk