Rear ride height adjustment

SuperDomestique said:

Believe what you want but it's incorrect. Changing fork height doesn't change anti-squat. The angle and force of the chain, which is the primary force for anti-squat, is still the same whether you move the forks up or down. Might not be your first rodeo but sounds like you're riding around in the clown car.

Many factors influence anti-squat not just suspension geometry (gearing, sag, electronics, etc).

Click to expand...

I am raising the fork to shorten the trail. And yes it doesn't affect the antisquat much (2nd order thing). Thank you craig you're exactly right.

SuperDomestique said:

Believe what you want but it's incorrect. Changing fork height doesn't change anti-squat. The angle and force of the chain, which is the primary force for anti-squat, is still the same whether you move the forks up or down. Might not be your first rodeo but sounds like you're riding around in the clown car.

Many factors influence anti-squat not just suspension geometry (gearing, sag, electronics, etc).

Click to expand...

May be a clown car but a fast one. Ship your bike to LA and we can race for pinks in the canyons... I have a question for you. My bike was built in July 2020 before the waterpump part number changed (it shows up as 1/1/21). If you know any ducati works mechanics maybe they'll know when the change was cut in in production. Thanks.

Id be a bit cautious lowering the front of the V4 , Below stock height you would be getting less than 100mm of trail. Ive been there (only on track, cant speak for a road bike), and the bike is very nervous , unstable entering and mid corner, awful under hard braking then not ideal trying to get smooth trail braking to the apex. I have my (base forks with NIX Ohlins cartridge) down so that the tops a flat with the clamps. Does require a bit of counter steer technique to turn, but i see that as a good thing. once lent over and then on exit it wants throttle input to lift on exit, not a bad either.
I think that 20mm longer SA on the SF is making corner exits more demanding ? Baggerman, is your bike squatting that much on gas on exit that the geometry is changing so much that you are pushing wide? Sometimes more preload to the shock will help or maybe a stronger spring ? A 20mm longer SA would warrant a heavier spring ?

baggerman said:

Ship your bike to LA and we can race for pinks in the canyons...

Click to expand...

There’s canyons in Louisiana?

baggerman said:

I am raising the fork to shorten the trail.

Click to expand...

Do you really mean that? shorten the trail? Do you have too much? how is that, or do you mean Rake angle?
Classic ducati numbers on rake and trail mean you could adjust from 24.5 to 23.5 increasing the rake angle, but at the expense of trail reducing what was an already low trail number further. Hence why offset yokes became available to restore the trail.

SuperDomestique said:

There’s canyons in Louisiana?

Click to expand...

Los Angeles. I guess you missed the squid.

Calderara di Reno said:

Id be a bit cautious lowering the front of the V4 , Below stock height you would be getting less than 100mm of trail. Ive been there (only on track, cant speak for a road bike), and the bike is very nervous , unstable entering and mid corner, awful under hard braking then not ideal trying to get smooth trail braking to the apex. I have my (base forks with NIX Ohlins cartridge) down so that the tops a flat with the clamps. Does require a bit of counter steer technique to turn, but i see that as a good thing. once lent over and then on exit it wants throttle input to lift on exit, not a bad either.
I think that 20mm longer SA on the SF is making corner exits more demanding ? Baggerman, is your bike squatting that much on gas on exit that the geometry is changing so much that you are pushing wide? Sometimes more preload to the shock will help or maybe a stronger spring ? A 20mm longer SA would warrant a heavier spring ?

Click to expand...

The problem with the bike is ultimately the wheelbase. At some point I'll go to a Panigale swingarm. I'm attempting to make the bike more agile. The set up is not the best race set up as ultimately the bike will oversteer. But that's what I want for the street. Also I run bags on the bike. So some of the changes are to compensate for the bags.

Seems counterintuitive. There’s a reason why road cars run understeer and not neutral/oversteer. GL if you run into any unsuspecting debris or decreasing radius corner. That instability may come to bite you back.

Loading the front will get the bike to turn harder. If you run into debris and have to put in a snap input you don't want the bike to push at turn in (or tuck because you need to pull your line down). I've literally ridden for hundreds of thousands of miles. So at this point I've dodged a lot of stuff. The streetfighter is not a panigale. It's 20 mm longer. The mass of the rider is further back. Bags in the back moves the mass further back. So what I think is my bike is front loaded like a panigale after I made the changes. The longer swingarm moves the mass a bit forward but gives up agility. It's a long motorcycle.

baggerman said:

Loading the front will get the bike to turn harder. If you run into debris and have to put in a snap input you don't want the bike to push at turn in (or tuck because you need to pull your line down). I've literally ridden for hundreds of thousands of miles. So at this point I've dodged a lot of stuff. The streetfighter is not a panigale. It's 20 mm longer. The mass of the rider is further back. Bags in the back moves the mass further back. So what I think is my bike is front loaded like a panigale after I made the changes. The longer swingarm moves the mass a bit forward but gives up agility. It's a long motorcycle.

Click to expand...

I get it, I have a 2009 SF1098 and it is brilliant on the road , set up by trial and error over a few years. Suspension quite soft , the front feels very much "under you", it also has the longer swing arm. By the way its awful on the track.

SuperDomestique said:

Believe what you want but it's incorrect. Changing fork height doesn't change anti-squat. The angle and force of the chain, which is the primary force for anti-squat, is still the same whether you move the forks up or down. Might not be your first rodeo but sounds like you're riding around in the clown car.

Many factors influence anti-squat not just suspension geometry (gearing, sag, electronics, etc).

Click to expand...

Do you guys realize that I was trying to get my bike to turn like a Panigale. So my clown car set-up (the bikes name is now the clown car) was an attempt to get the rake and trail on my SF to feel like what a Pani (really any other of my bikes) does at turn in. I note that nobody seemed to know that the SF actually has a 26.5 head and 102 mm trail. The hint in the specs is Pani 24.5 degrees 3.9 inch trail and the SF 24.5 degrees and 4 inch trail. To change the trail without changing the offset requires a rake change. I missed it (never registered). So I raised the fork to shorten trail and raised the rear to steepen rake. The good thing about this is I can change the bushings and pull the wheel under the bike and fix it. Ducati needs to stop this with the SF's. The 1098 SF is a really good motorcycle after you undid all the BS Ducati did because they were worried about wheelies being landed poorly. I wish I would have bought a Pani and changed the top triple instead then I also have the 6 HP from the stepper driven stacks.

And I agree if I had done this to a panigale it woulda been real twitchy (ouch).