Front mud guard fastenings .

Discuss all things 1970 & later Airheads right here.
User avatar
Sibbo
Posts: 5637
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:18 am
Location: Oz , half way up ,sitting on a wet spot .

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by Sibbo »

Yep ,I'll need to make up a template to exactly the right width to bend around ,
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
The Grateful Dead
Chuey
Posts: 7632
Joined: Mon Aug 02, 2010 11:56 pm

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by Chuey »

A design that's been rattling around in my brain since the early days of mountain bike riding follows:

You would build a structure from small diameter tubes that approximates the fender. It would attach near the middle of the fender and extend back to the lower edge of the fender. Using that structure to support the functional part of this contraption which resembles a miniature snow plow blade.

The idea would be to shave off the mud before it has a chance to build up. When you are in sticky mud, it can keep building up to the point that the bike becomes unmanageable.

Chuey
User avatar
Sibbo
Posts: 5637
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:18 am
Location: Oz , half way up ,sitting on a wet spot .

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by Sibbo »

Under my guard it would quickly bring her to a halt ,there is just too much room and it's too hard to get out .

Chuey ,I think the brace itself would shave the mud off quite effectively if the guard wasn't there to hold it hard against the tire .
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
The Grateful Dead
User avatar
dougie
Posts: 2540
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2010 6:19 pm
Location: Burlington Ontario, Canada

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by dougie »

Any possibility of discarding it in favour of a mudguard mounted under the lower fork yoke? (Like a Honda XR600).
I've spent most of my money on women, motorcycles, and beer.
The rest of it I just wasted.
User avatar
Sibbo
Posts: 5637
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:18 am
Location: Oz , half way up ,sitting on a wet spot .

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by Sibbo »

I could do but I still need a fork brace and they are essentially R65 forks , stiff but not hugely so .I'd prefer a few inches ,say 2 1/2'' or at least the option to bolt it in a higher position or remove completely in the mud .
"You ain't gonna learn what you don't want to know"
The Grateful Dead
wirewrkr
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:54 pm

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by wirewrkr »

DanielMc wrote:
Sibbo wrote:I wonder how the R 80GS forks are set up .........and BTW , thanks for the tip .


It pretty damn flimsy as a fork brace .
IIRC Sibbo, the forks on your ST are straight off the R65 road bike, and as such are a completely different marsupial to the forks fitted to the GS. which, again if memory serves, are the same as the ones fitted to the road-going twin shock R80/R100 from '81 to '84. I reckon the first mudguard in the fiche pic above shows the GS mudguard bolting directly to the underneath of the bottom yoke.
That's pretty much wrong.
The ST front end is for... an ST.
The G/S is the same way, for the G/S
They share some components here and there with other bikes, but are not direct lift offs of any other models.
User avatar
DanielMc
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:17 am
Location: England

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by DanielMc »

wirewrkr wrote:That's pretty much wrong.
The ST front end is for... an ST.
The G/S is the same way, for the G/S
They share some components here and there with other bikes, but are not direct lift offs of any other models.
I should have been clearer - the ST front end (instruments, headlight, yokes, sliders, spindle and mudguard), is pure R65. It does have slightly longer stanchions and so the springs will be longer too. Likewise the GS front end shares sliders, yokes and spindle with the twinshock road bikes. It too has slightly diferent stanchions but I have replaced a '81 front end with one sourced from a GS and I couldn't tell them apart.
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers might not be able to tell the difference." Samuel Clemens
wirewrkr
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:54 pm

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by wirewrkr »

If by Yokes you mean triple clamps, that is as wrong as a can be.
The R65 triples are much WIDER than the G/S and ST.
they do not interchange in any way. I will say what I said before.
That is just wrong,
Or in gentleman lingo, "you must be mistaken"
Must be an England only spec thing, but I know better than that.
User avatar
DanielMc
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:17 am
Location: England

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by DanielMc »

wirewrkr wrote:If by Yokes you mean triple clamps, that is as wrong as a can be.
The R65 triples are much WIDER than the G/S and ST.
they do not interchange in any way. I will say what I said before.
That is just wrong,
Or in gentleman lingo, "you must be mistaken"
Must be an England only spec thing, but I know better than that.
I can't see why you'd think the R65 yokes are wider when both the ST and the R65 use the exact same wheel spindle, headlight bracket and mudguard. I've worked on these bikes and have a fair idea of what fits and what doesn't. Perhaps you'll share your reasons for insisting that "I'm as wrong as can be".
"Never argue with a fool, onlookers might not be able to tell the difference." Samuel Clemens
wirewrkr
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Sep 27, 2010 6:54 pm

Re: Front mud guard fastenings .

Post by wirewrkr »

I say it because it's true.
They are approximately .25" wider.
Not only that, but the R65 is of a COMPLETELY different design.
Upper and lower yokes both being of cast aluminum, whereas the ST and G/S were
similar in that they were very similar in design to the standard big twin bikes from 1970-1984.
As a matter of fact they share the same dimensions center to center. The upper is the same type of flat steel as these bikes as well.
Post Reply