The New And Improved Unofficial R65 Forum V2
Technical Discussion => BMW Technical Q&A, Primarily R65 => Topic started by: MR.E on May 13, 2012, 03:59:52 PM
-
Now then
Sorry I've not been on for a while, life is still crap, but we're getting through - somehow
Anyway, I went out to the bike tonight, it looks ok with the new seat, however I think I fancy a larger rear tyre on there
Bike is a twinshock, but because of the sleeve over the shaft drive I can't fir a bigger tyre
Question is - can I run the shaft without the cover??
Does anyone have a pic/link with pics focusing on the final drive inner and outer??
Hope you're all well
Elliott
-
If you are talking about the metal tube that the driveshaft is enclosed in, no, it needs to be there, for lubricant for the driveshaft u-joint and the components of the driveshaft in the springloaded area and the splines where it mates into the final drive .
-
If you are talking about the metal tube that the driveshaft is enclosed in, no, it needs to be there, for lubricant for the driveshaft u-joint and the components of the driveshaft in the springloaded area and the splines where it mates into the final drive .
Bugger!!!
How much room is between the tube and shaft??
If it's a cm or so I'd be able to cut it out and weld the wall of the tube up closer to the driveshaft
Thanks
-
I'm not real sure, but there needs to be enough clearance to get the drive shaft out of the housing, in case parts need to be replaced .
A few members here, including myself have 120 width rear tires installed, I can only speak for the Metzler Lazertec tires that I have used .
A 120 width tire is a real pain to get off and on the bike, you need to deflate the tire to get it out, even then, it's a lot more work than it should be .
The are different length flanged spacers that stick out of the wheel bearing area on the wheel .
You can move the tire/wheel over, to where you may be able to get a 130 width rear tire on, but you would be in unknown territory there, as to whether it really would work .
With that width tire, you may need to remove the left shock absorber and muffler to get it off and on .
-
Cheers
I think I'll try find a spare swing arm unit and see what can be done first then.
Not sure what I can do with the rear wheel spacers, it took me ages to get the spoked wheels in right!!!
I'll keep you informed as to what I find out
Thanks
-
Bob, you failed to mention that that tube is 1/2 of the swingarm, and it is also what supports and locates the final drive and r/h shock.
Mr. E, I'm sure you are just trying to address some visual/aesthetic issue. The best advice I can give is to look for another bike, or plan on extensive modifications.
From a performance standpoint, these bikes run just fine on these "narrow" tires!
-
Yep, you ain't wrong!
It just doesn't look quite right to me!!
Been looking about at conversions that can be done with mono rear ends but I don't want to lose the spoke wheels either.
I've got the bike up for sale but it rides just too nice to let it go!!
Bob, what's the tyre you use 120-80-18??
Thanks
-
I've got a 120 / 90 -18 on my '81 R65 .
-
You also have to realize that one manufacturer's 120/90x18 is not the exact same dimensions as another manufacturer tire of the same designation.
The RATIO of height to width in all cases will be 120/90, but the exact numbers are NOT the actual tire height and width in many cases.
One manufacturer's 120/90 might just fit in you chassis, while another one WILL rub on the swingarm. Of course, tire pressure will and bike loading also have an impact.
-
I had a good look at the tire width issue recently and it is quite complicated. Actual tire width for the same tire varies according to the rim it's mounted on so you can't even rely on the manufacturers published width unless you take account of the rim width it is quoted for. And that's if the manufacturer even provides such information which many don't.
I did attempt to gather some actual measured data from mounted tires and was partially successful. The mounted width is the measured size for the rim width quoted where that info was provided.
[/img][/img]
-
For performance - the 110 x 90 is the best choice. Any larger and the bike becomes sluggish. I've found they handle best with the stock size tires.
And, as for aesthetics, I think the newer bikes with the rediculously wide tires look silly. I've had one of those - with a five inch wide rim, and guys would install the even wider 5.5" optional rim!
My advice is to leave the bike stock - maybe install slightly wider rims - 2.15 front and 2.5 rear - and run the stock tires. That should look cool enough! That's my plan for eventually converting the LS to wires. You'll have an excellent handling bike, and then get a newer bike with the wide tire.
It's funny how the sense of beauty can change - when I was younger I thought BMWs were ugly, or at least very odd. Now I think they're gorgeous! Just ride it as-is and give it time. ;)
-
Evening
I'm away so can't tell you what the tyre I have on it is.
I'm not after a massive tyre on it, but from the back the tyre is so small compared to the rest of the bike.
Now after a bit of looking about, what if I fit this to it??
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/BMW-R-series-swingarm-and-driveshaft-/110877572107?pt=UK_Motorcycle_Parts&hash=item19d0d17c0b#ht_500wt_689
It's a r60/7 swing arm from a '78 bike, would it work???
Sorry for the questions but I've got it in my head now!!!
Thanks
-
Maybe the same tyre size 4 S 18
http://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za/model/bmw/bmw_r60-7%2076.htm
Lou
-
Ahh
for a minute I had hope!! :'(
Think I may be beat, unless I convert to mono!
-
There are a lot of mono-shock airheads that had spoke wheels.
All of the GS'.
R100R
It requires some extensive modification to relocate the top shock mount. I'm not sure what the sub-frame for the seat would look like.
But it has been done. I've seen it on the internet, somewhere.
-
But part of the beauty of the R65 is its short wheel base - and you'd be giving that up just to mount a larger tire which will slow the steering, and the longer wheel base will slow it even more.
The smaller tire has less rolling resistance and allows one to corner quite aggressively.
It's a small, light weight, bike that is pretty damn good just as it is.
Take a look at the other bikes from that period - the norton commando, the ducati SS, the triumphs, BSA, Enfield, etc, ---- all small tires. It's just the way they were and they do just fine with them. They're not cruisers, or current sport bikes - it's just the way they are!
-
It's a small, light weight, bike that is pretty damn good just as it is.
I agree and to add to the list of bikes from the same era as airheads a 1976 Z900 560 lbs and 82 hp had the same stock rear tire size 4.00 x 18.
Maybe I didn't know any better but it really wasn't a problem other than tire wear. And with tire compounds so much better today the same size tire would be better still.
-
now then
it is an amazing bike, revvy and will really lean in to corners, found out on a round-about.
But all my previous bikes are superbikes (yamaha r6's) so i guess really thats the bike i love looking at - though can't own one cos it will kill me!
I love riding the bike, but looks wise is not really impressing me.
Who knows, i'll sort something out
Thanks
-
It looks like you have it set just fine, to me!
I think you are just bored.
Time for a 2nd bike?
-
shots of the bike
Think i may try a different tread on the rear tyre, as it is only asthetics!