Lowering a R65

[515_FOTO]

Hi all,
New member and, as of now, non-R65 owner here, but that may change. Looking to get the inseam challenged women in my life an option besides the back of my 82 R100RT.
The R65 has a reputaion of having a fairly low seat height at the start. I am wondering if anyone has further lowered their bike. We are talking truly short wife and daughters. 5 ft tall, and not a lot of it is leg! As this would be a learning bike for them, flat footing on both sides would be great, but at least a firm reach of the ground is the minimum I want to hit, otherwise it's gonna be one of those 250 cc japanese mini-cruiser things (savage, virago, ect).
Opinions? Lowering the rear, so long as there is tire clearance, seems strait forward- shorter overall length shocks with compressed length proper. Lowering the forks possible?
Thanks in advance for any ideas.
Larry

[Bob_Roller]

The usual approach to lowering the seat height, is to reduce the foam in the seat .

A gel pad can be added, if the foam thickness turns out to be insufficient when you get done .

Adjusting the fork length, and rear shock length, may result in handling issues .

[Barry]

I just took my 5ft 3"wife out to the garage and she can put both feet down but not flat footed. A one side flat foot was  only a slight lean for her.  The pre 81 models are reckoned to have a slightly lower seat than the later models.

You could raise the stanchions in the yokes but only by a few mm as there is very little clearance under the master cylinder.

[515_FOTO]

Wow, thanks Barry. My 5' 2" wife got a laugh when I told her someone across the pond dragged his wife out to his garage to help us out..
Sounds good. The real issue of course is the 4' 11" 15 year old daughter that will need all the ground reach she can muster. She is none to happy about the height we have apparently passed down to her.

[Barry]

No problem 515 it was the least I could do. There's nothing like a pragmatic solution to a problem is there. My wife got a laugh out of it too.

BTW we stayed near Concord some years back at the start of a "New England in the Fall" holiday. Loved it.  Must be coming up to that time of year soon.  

[Lucky_Lou]

I dont think youll find much better than a r65 ive seen some cafe racer versions with very low custom seats you will gain only about an inch using a gel conversion on a standard one but with the smaller wheels (18inch v 19inch)and shorter wheelbase than the r100 it should make a confident ride i only have a 29inch inseam and find the r65 excellent the only other bikes that come near are the Honda Shadow and some Hardlies which we arnt allowed to talk about. [smiley=wink.gif]
Lou
ps take a peep at the red r65 on the trading post that looks to have a lower seat than normal.

[nhmaf]

At least a few of our members are females of quite diminutive stature, sucanada is just a couple inches over 5 feet, and I think that msbuck is right around 5 feet ?   Anyhow, they both ride R65s with relatively few machine modifications.  One thing which helps Sue out is she selects boots with thicker soles and has inserts inside the boots.   Her R65LS's seat is modified, but I don't think that it is any lower than normal.   She has no problems with this setup, so if they can get close with at least 1 foot flat on an R65 a change of footwear may get you the little bit extra.

I'm sure that those ladies can offer other ideas/suggestions, too.

The R65 LS seat is also slight lower than the non-LS seat, but altering the seat stuffing etc can probably make up the difference.

[Altritter]

Welcome, 515; you've come to the right place!

FWIW, I'll share my continuing thought process. I bought my R65 about 2 years ago, and this has been a continuing project for me. I'm a bit short in the inseam myself, and my 1981 is marginal. (At 5'6", I'm about where your spouse is—I can put both feet on the ground, but not totally flatfoot without effort.) The only time I feel really insecure is when I have to stop perpendicular to the fall line (slope), and the uphill foot makes contact but the downhill foot hits only air.)

The saddle is a good first step. For additional lowering, here are a few other possibilities, listed in order of preference, IMHO (effectiveness, weighted by cost, PITA factor, and potential handling tradeoff): (1) shorter rear shocks; (2) lower profile tires; and (3) change the height of the front fork/frame junction point. All these have been covered on this site during the past few months.

Time doesn't permit me to give a fully half-baked exposition of these factors. At the moment, I have a sense of potential lowering factor of the shocks and tires. (Was planning to order and install 11.88" shocks, but had to rearrange my priorities after a stupid driver ran me off the road in my cage two weeks ago—couldn't get her license #, and the cost of new tire (hit a curb in avoiding her), realignment & inspection amounted to >$500.

My SWAG is that shorter shocks drop the seat height as much as 1" inch or so (depending on shock length currently on the bike), and going back  to narrower OEM, lower-profile (.80, if you can find them) tires can reduce height another 1/2 to 1"). Playing with the fork can help, but I'm not inclined to do so because reducing fork rake might make an already agile bike "jumpy" in quick maneuvers.

Small and light as it is, I wonder if an R65 is the optimal starter for your smaller, younger family members just beginning to ride. If your budget can stand it, a small displacement (250 max) rice mill might be better.

[Rob Valdez 79 R65]

[size=12]Small and light as it is, I wonder if an R65 is the optimal starter for your smaller, younger family members just beginning to ride. If your budget can stand it, a small displacement (250 max) rice mill might be better.[/size]

[size=16]Praise the Lord!  Say Hallelujah![/size]



[size=12]One of the reasons Sue (and Aïda?) are such confident riders, is they have roots in dirt bikes.  The dirt is the BEST place to learn to ride.[/size]

[515_FOTO]

Yes, I gotta go with that idea. I wish I had started on dirt. We do have a mini-bike fest among friends up here where a friend brings a trailer of 80-125cc dirt bikes to a local pit and we ride/race and the kids have done that.(nothing like 8 of these bikes with 40 year old yahoos on them leaving the starting line, jockying for the first turn)  Of course these are SMALL, centrifical clutch bikes, but helps with understanding cornering, tires sliding, ect. I really don't see their first bike as a dirt bike. I am leaning toward a older small japanese, but street style, more like a 188/250 Honda Twinstar, for the learing curve and be fixing up/lowering a R65 for them for when the confidence and experience is there.

[sixfifty]

i'm 5'4", and the seat height isn't the issue for me so much as having to get off the bike to use the side stand.  my left ankle is a little flaky, and with hard cases and a tail bag it can get mildly hilarious to watch.

i can have all toes on the ground, or one flat foot.  my rear suspension isn't set up for me (yet) and doesn't have much sag, so i have to take care of that this winter.

for someone of limited height and riding experience, i think a small, light weight bike like a 250 ninja or an enduro would be a good choice.  plus, when it come to dropping and recovering, the r65 might not be that great of a choice.

my dr200 isn't that great at highway speeds, but it's a grin-inspiring little bike that i'd ride rtw if i had the time.  

[msbuck]

Msbuck here with the real experience...

I'm 5'0" with an inseam of 26 inches.  I CANNOT get flat footed on this bike, no matter what I do.    Personally, I would not begin to learn to ride on this bike...Hate to say that in front of all these R65 lovers, but it's true for me.  I put low profile tires on the bike, lower shocks, lowered the front forks to match (had to use barbacks to move the handlebars,etc out of the way) and carved about 3 inches out of the seat.  I'm still on my tiptoes.  Don't think you can do much more than that without MAJOR modifications (cutting the frame, etc. which I don't recommend.)

The weight was the biggest issue for me when I began riding this bike.  I dropped it 5 times the first year - it was all parking lot incidences, but nevertheless, it's a bit humbling.  I know the R65 is the lightest of the beemers, but as a starter bike and being inseam challenged, I don't think this is the way to go.

I actually learned on a Yamaha 185 Exciter.  I could get my feet flat on the ground and it was light enough I could easily muster it around.  (Contrary to what Rob said) I did not start in the dirt, but I wish I had. I think learning to ride on a smaller, lighter bike and then moving up to the R65 is the way to go.   She can learn the basics of riding (controls, clutch, etc) without the intimidation of the large bike.  Then once she feels confident and doesn't have to THINK so much about HOW to ride, she can move up to a bike that she can think about handling instead of the basics.  You don't want to turn her against riding off the bat because the bike is too much for her to start with.

Just my experienced  [smiley=2cents.gif] worth.  Good luck with it!  

[Altritter]

The dirt is the BEST place to learn to ride.

Roger that! (BTW, I mean that in the radio communications sense—not in a bawdy Shakespearean-English way.   ) Wish I had done some small-displacement dirt riding as a young adult. Too late now because I don't want to ding my '65, and a second bike would have a divorce petition attached to it.

To flesh my earlier comments: I think the R65 is the lowest, most civilized  BMW you're likely to find. (Granted, some Classics—the /2s and earlier—look lower, but I've never had the chance to mount one. Anyway, who among us can afford a to buy really nice Classic these days?) Even after two years, I still have an occasional uneasy feeling about my bike's height. It can sneak up on a new rider without warning. For example, I find that topping off the tank of my bike affects its center of gravity just enough to cause me to be extra careful for a few miles until I become accustomed to it.

When I took the MSF Beginning Rider Course for my license endorsement, I rode a loaner Honda 250 Rebel. The seat height was very comfortable, but I disliked the feel of the throttle intensely. (The hair-trigger throttle was a significant factor in my dropping the Rebel on my leg during the course.) For that reason, I can't recommend the Rebel, but that's just my opinion; other riders likely have had a much better experience. OTOH, I've heard really good things about the Ninja, though I've never ridden one.

Prowl the various archives on this site, and you'll find some learned discussions of all the lowering options available. (Numerous others are much better forum guides than I.) Personally, I would lower the steering head on the fork tubes as a last resort only, because doing so would decrease the bike's rake angle and trail, causing handling changes that I'm not qualified to predict. (See David Hough's books.)

[msbuck]

Personally, I would lower the steering head on the fork tubes as a last resort only, because doing so would decrease the bike's rake angle and trail, causing handling changes that I'm not qualified to predict.  

I have to admit that I no longer have my front forks lowered.  I definitely had some handling issues on the way back from Houston early on.  Put them back where they belonged (even with the lower shocks) and things went back to normal.  I had, not really a wobble, but a 'rocking' side to side that only appeared at higher interstate highway speeds.  It was noticeable enough that another motorcyclist waved us over to tell my husband (?!) about it.  I guess he thought I didn't know enough to know it was happening.  DUH!  Anyway I learned to keep the speed down and made it back to NC without incident.  Then had it looked at pronto.  

(Granted, some Classics—the /2s and earlier—look lower, but I've never had the chance to mount one. Anyway, who among us can afford a to buy really nice Classic these days?)

Yep, the /2s are definitely lower.  They actually fit me nicely!   I'd love to have one, but as you say, they are classics and not cheap to come by unless they are not very road worthy/reliable.  But 'cha gotta love  'em!

[drewboid]

Don't start her on a bike that is too large! Noemi put together this list:
http://www.nebcom.com/noemi/moto/sbl.sbl.html
My fiance learned to ride on the R65 (we did have a shadow but it was too top heavy) but did drop it many times at stops and in the parking lot. Engine guards are recomended.
If she had started on a smaller / lighter bike it may have been easier - she would have outgrown a Rebel 250 within a year but looking back it would have been a good investment.  There is always a resale market for the smaller bikes and you will get most of your investment back next year. Consider the R65 a step up after they get confident with riding skills.  Ymmv - good luck though.
ps - I would not recommend a /2 as a starter bike (although my fiance did use mine until I found the R65) Kick starting after stalling is too much of a pain in the ... and can be discouraging. Electric start is a wonderful invention.