Modification of rear shock

Tried searching but it appears everyone looking to lower the ST has opted to replace the rear shock. I've got that on my list for future improvements (28" inseam here) but don't think the wife would be happy about me spending the $$ at this moment. Haven't pulled the rear shock to evaluate the possibility of modification so thought I'd ask the experts. Is there any room for modification of the top of the rear shock to shorten the distance between the top of the spring and the eye hole? I know that means playing with the hydraulics and that it would mess with the handling to some degree but was just thinking that it might be a fun project while the weather is cold. Anyone have some good pics of the top of the shock? Is the part where the top of the spring sits and the preload connects welded on or mechanically connected?

Thanks

#edit#
I added a plan of attack below. Take a look and let me know what you think.

In my opinion having had a lowered sport bike, what you do in the rear needs to be done in the front. I have a 29" inseam so I feel your pain, but I'm 6' 1" tall so just short legs. I would do some real life measuring before lowering , two 2x4's on there side would be 1.5" in added height so you can see where you are truly comfortable , if you can get your feet flat footed on those then I would look at lowering 1" front and rear starting with the forks. You will also have to look at cutting the side and center stand as that 1" will make the bike stand straight up and easy to fall over.The St 1100 I purchased already had a Corbin seat and at 29" inseam I can almost completely flat foot, and to my knowlege my bike has not been lowered, finding a different seat might be cheaper and safer than altering IMO.

I've already dropped the forks 14mm in the trees and shaved the stock seat and am still just barely able to get on the balls of both feet. Too old to take this bike to its extremes.

Just trying to see if there is a way to provide a cost-effective option until I can buy a lowering shock.

Thanks

punder said:

In my opinion having had a lowered sport bike, what you do in the rear needs to be done in the front.

Click to expand...

Only if there's a need to preserve the factory handling. A drastic change in the geometry might induce more violent unwanted handling.

Some points to consider:

•The ST isn't a pure sport bike.
•The ST 1300 is said to have quicker steering than the 1100 IIRC.
•A shorter rear shock would slow the handling. Heavy? Maybe. Maybe not but heavier anyway.
•Lowering the forks in the trees without changing rear end geometry would quicken the steering.
•Lowering both the front and rear of the bike reduces ground clearance.

As the ST isn't a sport bike but a sport-touring bike how any changes in handling affect the rider would depend on their individual riding style. Assuming dangerous handling characteristics aren't induced I think changes in the front end need be done only if they help the individual.

jfheath said:

There may be plenty of leeway available, but they are certainly things to think about.

Click to expand...

True enough.

Perhaps you should modifiy your riding style instead of the bike.
You should NEVER have both feet, or as you state, the balls of both feet on the ground at the same time.
Your right foot should always be on the foot peg, covering the rear brake when stopped.
When you try to place both feet on the ground, you loose maximum breaking if needed, such as a rear end collision, pushing you into the intersection etc.
You also risk having the bike teeter back and forth, and could loose your footing on sand, oil, debris, etc. and drop your bike.
It would be much safer to keep your right foot up, thus having a tripod on the ground (two tires and one flat foot) rather than tippy toe it back and forth shifting your balance and risking a fall.
People often freak out about not being able to touch the ground with both feet.....Next time you watch someone ride a 10 speed and stop, pay attention.
.02

I've been riding for about 20 years and pretty comfortable with my ability to handle a motorcycle. Even when I am on a cruiser I rarely have both feet flat when riding. That being said, there are PLENTY of times where being able to flat foot is highly advantageous. Parking lots is one example. Backing a bike up if the area is flat is much more difficult if you can barely touch the ground.

I'll just be clear for anyone else, the tone Igofar takes is a bit condescending and, more importantly, they missed the point. I am lowering my bike. Get over it. This thread is to discuss options for doing that in a cost effective manner. If you don't want to be part of that discussion, move along.

I have ridden with a fellow ST1300 rider who had additional soles put on his riding boots to overcome his vertical challenge. Just another option which many do not think of.

I am using this bike to commute to work as often as I can which requires dress shoes. Can't add an inch of sole to all of my dress shoes, boots, etc. Before someone lambasts me for not wearing boots, my commute to work is usually a few miles (hotel to office) when I am on business trips. I understand it's not ideal but it is my reality. Usually don't have time to change out of boots to dress shoes in the parking lot.

Please, not looking for alternatives, reasons not to lower, etc. Just wondering if anyone has modified the OEM shock.

I just went out and pulled my shock to take a look at things. it appears that there is a retainer ring set into an embedded groove in the housing. I don't have the luxury of pulling it apart right now since I don't have a back-up to use until I get it back together but I have a plan forming. What are your thoughts about this plan (other than "don't lower the bike", "just buy a new shock", etc)?

Drain the hydraulic fluid.
Compress spring
Remove retainer ring
Remove outer housing (not sure what it's called but it's the aluminum heavy-duty part with the hydraulic connection)
Mark inner housing about 1" above current groove (need to determine the actual distance possible due to location of hydraulic holes, amount of travel, etc )
Using a rotary tool, CAREFULLY create a new groove
Reassemble to the new groove height
Decompress spring
Refill with fluid
Try her out

Anyone who has pulled the OEM shock apart know of anything that might make this impossible?

Thanks

cvillechopper, I hear where your coming from. Although it is not an issue for me (32"inseam), I am surprised at how high this bike is. After just having my shock off, I can say that I really dont think you can physically shorten the body of the shock. But... I just went over and had a look and I can see a way of POSSIBLY lowering the bike that would be cost effective if you are handy. I have attached a picture showing how there is material available to raise the mounting hole in the lower shock mount. If you raised it 1/2 or3/4 inch, it should drop the bike and inch or so. The shock mount is roughly 1/2 way between the swingarm pivot and the axle. Now, the shock isnt 90 degrees so that 1 inch isnt guaranteed and math isnt my strong point, but you get my thinking? Now, there would be clearance issues you will face. The mounting boss on the swingarm would have to be trimmed down on the top to allow the shock to lower but since the forces are pushing down, I dont think taking material off the top of the boss will have an adverse effect on strength of the boss. You will also have to trim the lower part of the shock mount so the "tabs" clear the swingarm. I am only mentioning this cause you asked for a way of doing this without purchasin g a new shock. This is the only way I can see doing it. I am including a rear view of the shock mount to show the clearance issue you would face

If I understand you correctly, by doing what you are implying, You will be taking all the preload out of the spring. The spring is installed at a precise length and needs that ring to be where it is now.

Now we're talking! I like the thinking. There might even be enough material to shave off some from the inside of the lower mount on the shock to get the clearance. Would be alot easier to grind that down off the bike than to try and grind the swing arm but might not get enough. Might need to add in a plug of some sort to the old holes and trim the bottom off a bit. This sounds promising and much less involved than messing with the other end. Also, it keeps the spring characteristics the same which works for me (only ~145-150 lbs). I might need to pull the shock again and get some precise measurements of that lower end unless someone has one sitting around.

Thanks Bmacleod!

Bmacleod said:

cvillechopper, I hear where your coming from. Although it is not an issue for me (32"inseam), I am surprised at how high this bike is. After just having my shock off, I can say that I really dont think you can physically shorten the body of the shock. But... I just went over and had a look and I can see a way of POSSIBLY lowering the bike that would be cost effective if you are handy. I have attached a picture showing how there is material available to raise the mounting hole in the lower shock mount. If you raised it 1/2 or3/4 inch, it should drop the bike and inch or so. The shock mount is roughly 1/2 way between the swingarm pivot and the axle. Now, the shock isnt 90 degrees so that 1 inch isnt guaranteed and math isnt my strong point, but you get my thinking? Now, there would be clearance issues you will face. The mounting boss on the swingarm would have to be trimmed down on the top to allow the shock to lower but since the forces are pushing down, I dont think taking material off the top of the boss will have an adverse effect on strength of the boss. You will also have to trim the lower part of the shock mount so the "tabs" clear the swingarm. I am only mentioning this cause you asked for a way of doing this without purchasin g a new shock. This is the only way I can see doing it. I am including a rear view of the shock mount to show the clearance issue you would face

Click to expand...

Yep. I was looking at it as a temporary fix but your suggestion solves that issue. Good looking out.

Bmacleod said:

If I understand you correctly, by doing what you are implying, You will be taking all the preload out of the spring. The spring is installed at a precise length and needs that ring to be where it is now.

Click to expand...

Cvillechopper said:

I've been riding for about 20 years and pretty comfortable with my ability to handle a motorcycle. Even when I am on a cruiser I rarely have both feet flat when riding. That being said, there are PLENTY of times where being able to flat foot is highly advantageous. Parking lots is one example. Backing a bike up if the area is flat is much more difficult if you can barely touch the ground.

I'll just be clear for anyone else, the tone Igofar takes is a bit condescending and, more importantly, they missed the point. I am lowering my bike. Get over it. This thread is to discuss options for doing that in a cost effective manner. If you don't want to be part of that discussion, move along.

Click to expand...

FYI, I am sorry if you think my post sounded condescending, it was not intended to be. I was simply offering a solution ( to discuss options for doing that in a cost effective manner ) etc.
I have seen folks with 20 years of motorcycle riding under their belt, fail motor school. We can all learn from each other, if we are open minded and share ideas.
As other members have pointed out, the modifications that you are thinking about could be dangerous and cause handling/weaving issues at the very least.
Your comment of "get over it" sounded more condescending than my suggestions to try something new.
And yes, I have been riding bikes, on the street, longer than you have been alive.
Ride safe.

My issue is that this is a technical section of the forum and I am asking a technical question. Offering a "solution" which is not technical nor germane to the question asked is not helpful. Additionally there seems to be a misunderstanding of the effect of lowering the rear of a bike. In no way does simply lowering the rear end cause a weaving issue. Not technically possible. It can make the steering a little heavier (assuming you don't lower the forks to put the geometry back to stock which I stated I have already done).

I've also seen people who have been on bikes a long time make some rather novice mistakes. It happens. I was simply illustrating that your tone came across as being intended for a novice (which I am not) and did not address the issue. Too many times on forums like this people feel the need to put in opinion where technical responses are needed and it gets me a bit agitated.

Igofar said:

FYI, I am sorry if you think my post sounded condescending, it was not intended to be. I was simply offering a solution ( to discuss options for doing that in a cost effective manner ) etc.
I have seen folks with 20 years of motorcycle riding under their belt, fail motor school. We can all learn from each other, if we are open minded and share ideas.
As other members have pointed out, the modifications that you are thinking about could be dangerous and cause handling/weaving issues at the very least.
Your comment of "get over it" sounded more condescending than my suggestions to try something new.
And yes, I have been riding bikes, on the street, longer than you have been alive.
Ride safe.

Click to expand...

Dumb question from me - Is the seat in the low/low position? I have a 28" inseam too FWIW, 155 lbs.

From post #1.....to my knowledge none of us here are experts and it's JUST MY OPINION and worth exactly what you pay for it.

DIY cutting, modifying, grinding, etc. the shock and/or swingarm is not something I would do or suggest. If something breaks or gives way while the bike is in motion you could be injured or killed.

dduelin said:

Dumb question from me - Is the seat in the low/low position? I have a 28" inseam too FWIW, 155 lbs.

From post #1.....to my knowledge none of us here are experts and it's JUST MY OPINION and worth exactly what you pay for it.

DIY cutting, modifying, grinding, etc. the shock and/or swingarm is not something I would do or suggest. If something breaks or gives way while the bike is in motion you could be injured or killed.

Click to expand...

Yep. I've got the seat in the lowest position (front and back) and have shaved about an inch from the foam. Front forks are dropped 14mm and I can just get the balls of both feet to touch. Not a problem usually but backing out of the garage, parking spaces, etc can be a pain and I don't have the luxury of pulling in the other direction most times. Also, I say I have a 28" inseam but my wife thinks it probably 27". I chalk it up to man-math

As to the concerns about modifying the shock or swingarm, I understand your concern. I've been rebuilding motorcycles from the frame, up since before I was legal to ride them on the road. Trying to find a balance between safety and cost. If it was a simple as grinding a bit off of the mount on the swing arm and drilling a couple of holes, that would be great as long as care is taken to do it correctly. Looking at the clearance available, it would take a little too much grinding of the swingarm mount to be safe and there isn't space to grind the inner area of the shock to get the needed space. Looks like I'm back to modifying the top, which would reduce the preload on the spring (if it's even possible to do), buying a shock, or figuring out something else...

Another option I'm playing with is a swingarm mount relocation similar to how the lowering block works for the the Versys (https://motowerk.com/collections/kawasaki-versys-650/products/standard-lowering-kit-for-versys-650). Can't find anything like this for the ST but it looks like there is room back there for this approach. Thoughts?

Cvillechopper said:

Another option I'm playing with is a swingarm mount relocation similar to how the lowering block works for the the Versys (https://motowerk.com/collections/kawasaki-versys-650/products/standard-lowering-kit-for-versys-650). Can't find anything like this for the ST but it looks like there is room back there for this approach. Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I was thinking of something along this line earlier, looking at your post, but the problems I see are you are changing the plane that the shock is operating in and it might have an adverse effect on the springing of the shock. Im not sure, but it looks like it will make the shock stiffer. From the picture on that website, it looks like it "flattens" the shock quite a bit. I would be interested in real feedback from users of this as to how the suspension changed after adding this. Also , looking at my bike, the spring is only 1/2" from the battery box. Moving the shock back/up even a little will cause it to hit the battery. I have a new spring and it is larger than the stocker so your clearance could be more.

Yep. That's where I'm not sure about the impact. I thought the increase in angle would actually reduce the effectiveness of the spring (more rear wheel travel required for the same amount of spring compression) so dialing up the preload could potentially offset that. If it makes the spring more effective I think that might be ok (assuming it could fit) because the rear does seem to be a little under sprung to me.
The versys has a more vertical shock to start with so the change in angle doesn't seem to be an issue. Heard great things about this solution on the V650.

I might have to undo the lower mount and see what type of clearance I'd have with the shock raised a little. Then to find someone with access to some aluminum blocks and a mill...

Bmacleod said:

I was thinking of something along this line earlier, looking at your post, but the problems I see are you are changing the plane that the shock is operating in and it might have an adverse effect on the springing of the shock. Im not sure, but it looks like it will make the shock stiffer. From the picture on that website, it looks like it "flattens" the shock quite a bit. I would be interested in real feedback from users of this as to how the suspension changed after adding this. Also , looking at my bike, the spring is only 1/2" from the battery box. Moving the shock back/up even a little will cause it to hit the battery. I have a new spring and it is larger than the stocker so your clearance could be more.

Click to expand...

Cvillechopper said:

I rarely have both feet flat when riding. That being said, there are PLENTY of times where being able to flat foot is highly advantageous. Parking lots is one example. Backing a bike up if the area is flat is much more difficult if you can barely touch the ground.

Click to expand...

+1 100% I can just flatfoot my ST at a standstill and moving (not riding) the bike around with or without power can get a little tenuous at times. It's worse when tire pressure drops a little even though I can flatfoot (at a standstill) a little bit easier.

I probably would/will never drop the front forks but might be tempted to go to a shorter shock and or possibly a lower profile tire. I would not miss a little less quickness of steering.

The idea of a RDL floats around in the back of my mind and would exacerbate my issue so I keep an eye out for all things lowering.

Those who can't flatfoot at all but are totally comfortable on their chosen ride (especially the ST) have my envy. But for me flatfooting is my preference.

While a strong tripod is better than a weak quadpod there are times when a strong quadpod is superior and preferred at least where man and machine are concerned. Anybody remember Artie Johnson?

Cvillechopper said:

I am lowering my bike. Get over it. This thread is to discuss options for doing that in a cost effective manner. If you don't want to be part of that discussion, move along.

Click to expand...

Ok no argument from me. To that end I opine that I've heard of people having a shock disassembled/shortened/welded and it wasn't cheap. NO memory of any details nor how it held up. I do know an excellent welder/rider (V-STrom but he's still a decent guy) so I'll run this by him as a purely hypothetical.

I think the advantage of an improved shock and spring combination along with a lower ride height might be money better spent than shortening a shock anyway not to mention if structural integrity can be preserved.