Dog Bones

Just wondering how much higher are race bikes compared to stock? What size dog bones do you guys use or is it just a different sub frame?

I want to slowly turn my K4 into a race bike then tell my girlfriend i want to race. She can't moan once i have spent a **** load of money.

Chris

No point messing with dog bones if you want to race it then!

Originally Posted by Mike1234

No point messing with dog bones if you want to race it then!

Mike, as I understand it you are Mr MiniTwins, correct? ie the owner of the series name, rules, etc.

given that it's a budget race series, I'm curious why (cheap) dogbones to raise the rear ride height are outlawed, but (expensive) variable-height shocks are okay. given also that it's pretty much essential to either raise the rear or drop the front of an SV to get it to handle properly. I'm just curious, there's no hidden agenda to the question

note: I really, really don't want this to turn into another never-ending shock thread, so can the usual suspects keep their oars out of this one please

Because it is difficult to police. What starts out as a simple change to the dog bones could end up being a full rising rate suspension linkage. Where would you suggest we stop?

Why not just use a longer GSXR shock if you are really on that much of a budget? Or, more importantly, consider just how crap the stock shock would be for going racing regardless of the ride height.

For less than the cost of two pairs of race tyres you would be happy to go with the stock shock and different dog bones that will eat your tyres quicker, make the bike handle poorly and make it a lot more challenging to ride?

Originally Posted by Mike1234

Because it is difficult to police

that's fine, that's all I was wondering about. I really hope that you don't think I'm having a go, I think minitwins is great, I might even give it a go

& I wasn't considering using a standard SV shock btw

I love the way you now feel obliged to caveat everything you say with 'don’t take this the wrong way’ weazelz!! {sniggers}

I have met Mike on a few occasions, I don’t get the impression he the sort of bloke to get the hump if you ask him a straight question about the series, even if it is just out of curiosity!?!

He is no thicky and if you pass a valid comment/suggestion with good grounding, I doubt he’d take it as an insult and he will give you a well thought out reasoning behind the decisions that have been made!!

Sorry to hijack thread further (but I think the original question has been answered ... later dogbones are illegal, you are wasting your time with a stock shock anyway and fitting a race shock gives massive ride height adjustment anyway) ...

Ok, so I have another question for Mike in a similar vein to yours weazelz … it is legal to swap cams ‘like-for-like’ between earlier and later models (which is what I did to mine in the end), but why can’t one use an inlet on the exhaust too as that gives more lift/more power (Obviously as long as the bike doesn’t then exceed the 72hp limit) even a set of Kent Cams would be cheaper than NEW Suzi ones? (do they even make them for the SV?!!?? ) And how do you police cams anyway? They have to be harder/more intrusive to check than dogbones and linkages? I presume a bike could be randomly stripped, but as long as the bike is <=72hp is that likely to ever happen? I personally stayed the right side of the law as that is the sort of person I am, but I am not sure I can see the harm in allowing punters to get up the HP limit the cheapest way they can …

I say all this as the only legal way I can get my bike up to that limit is later cams, a full race system and BMC RS filter and dynojet kit, I have the cams in mine now, but that's still the fat part of a grand of development if I want to get to the HP limit … if I could just drop an inlet cam on the exhaust, I could probably get the same sort of power as fitting a race system and save myself ~£600.

Or another way to keep things cheaper (and my preferred method (although I realise it is a bit to late now )) is drop the HP limit so that fitting a race system and race filter would make the bikes exceed the HP limit ... that alone has to save a punter the best part of a grand in development costs … was the 72 limit what a bog stock pointy produced when tested and that is why it was set there?

I too love the Minitwins concept and think Mike et all have done a marvelous job in taking it from a concept to a well supported series of its own right!! But I still feel that there is pressure/room to spend serious money to get a truly competitive bike … is that not against the minitwin ethos??

So again, why has there been any ‘wiggle room’ on engine mods allowed at all??

I suppose the simple answer is like Mike inferred ... at ~£230 a set of tyres and ~£200 entry fees a round, in the big scheme of things, even these development costs are minor ... but isn't that just a slippery slope?!

Sorry I waffled

Oh and I am not suggesting for one second the rules should be changed (it is prolly too far down the line for that anyway now?), just asking for the logic against what I have said/highlighted

The cams wont really make a massive difference, compared injected ones (after many dyno runs and cam swaps btw) and if you do the swap then the bike doesn't have any exhaust cams fitted (regardless of location).
The 72hp was based on Mikes original Carby and on a good day a good carby can be on the limit (even before the injected cams etc)

There is so much data on the SV's now on the dyno a cam swap should be picked up as it gives different torque and midrange characteristics.

If cam changes were allowed where would it stop as Kent do make cams and will grind them from blanks if req so lift and duration can be played with increasing power right to the redline or fatter midrange, these increases can only be acheived with development...ie money.

Std cams are pretty well marked and fairly recogniseable as are std cam wheels so it has been left that std parts should be fitted and in the location Suzuki intended.
With the 'Newer parts can be fitted to older models' covering the swapping of parts.
My bike was originally built as a Minitwin and I tried to stretch the above rule as much as possible by fuel injecting a carby using all std parts, but a couple of frame clearence issues stretched the rules a bit far and Mike and Tim decided not to allow it, this proved it was not legally possible to inject a carby for Minitwins.
Good job really as it would have never been a Thunderbike otherwise