I wonder...

Just my $.02,
For my Z1 (which will mostly be used for looong distance rides when finished) I'm using a PMC frame bracing kit, stiffer springs/heavier weight oil/gold cartridge fork emulator valves in the stock front and ZRX shocks in the back. Not that major but I figure it'll kick the handling up from the flexi flyer the Z1 could be to a fairly stable ride

WG, You're gonna love the S&W shocks. Mine (set up for the KZ650) still look and work like new. I replaced them with Hagons only because they look more like the stock shocks. I'll probably put the S&Ws on eBay one day when I learn how.

The interesting thing about the Chassis tech forum is that almost NO ONE asks how to improve the chassis on their bike to improve handling.

The Clymer manual I have for the KZ650 has an area that discusses improving handling.

I've used it as a baseline over the years.

My bike has Magnum Progessive springs in the front end, an ATK fork brace, tappered roller bearings in the stem, I have also raised the forks a touch to lower the front end. I have an 18" front Z1R rim that will go on next tire change.
On the back end there are Koni shocks and a braced stock swingarm.

After adding the bracing to the swingarm, I did notice handling was much better over expansion joints and such at highway speeds.

Over all I think tires are one of the most important items to look after. Proper inflation and trueness of the wheels, good bearings all around etc.

WG ++++1.
You do NOT have to be a rocket scientist to look at, say, the cross section of a 120/90 x 18 tire compared to a 180/55ZR17 tire and note that the distance the 180 has to move through as it rolls from one edge to the other is FAAARRRRR greater than the distance the 120 has to roll through. Can you say "slower side to side transition" ???
Can you say "slower turn in" ?? This applies, of course, to use of wide tires on old-style frames and suspensions.
This is NOT what you want in an older bike that is already "handling challenged" when compared to more modern bikes.
For old KZ's, stock size tires (or maybe one size larger, max)....but best quality/stickiest that you can afford are the answer, IMO. You can skimp on some things on a bike....but tires ain't one of them, IMO.

Over all I think tires are one of the most important items to look after. Proper inflation and trueness of the wheels, good bearings all around etc.

Truer words were never spoken, Rob. It is amazing how much money and how much grief can be saved by regular use of a $3.00 tire gauge and some inspection/attention.

My .02....

Better brakes, better tires, better suspension, stiffer forks and swing....So I´d say it´s well worth itB)

Yes to your answer Mark before the rake she was not bad on the track,after the rake she got a lot tighter.now also that i did not mention is that she also has tapered brgs and fork brace,stiffer springs with 3' spacers for very little dampening force on hard braking. now take in mind this bike is set up for track racing not riding on the street.where you also have two very different speeds.also the tire i use are avon race tires am22/am23,when the get hot they stick like gum to your shoe on a hot day.[shit don't you just hate that,now to find a stick to scrape this shit off ] but for the most part street bikes look great to what ever mods one does to them i guess thats what sets us all apart from each other.in the end its all for the love of the bike and riding them.to each there own.oh by the way George hope you and the missus had a great weekend,take care:cheer:
Regards Paul

Thats interesting Paul.
Can u elaborate on why the new bikes have gone to less rake, and the old ones more rake, for better performance?

Stiffen the suspension all you want. The problem is the weak frame it's connected to. The stock frame is a twig. Pretty soon someones mods are gonna cause a major failure.....the result ? A big get off. Cabt put new tech on a 30 year old dinosaur. Kinda like your grandma getting breast implants.

Well Mark theres not much to elaborate on.the old bikes you had to rake them to get better steering whether you ran an 19" or 18" front tire.the new bikes on the other hand some are 17" and 16" tires so there you would need less rake. its bad enough that you are pointing downwards as it is on some of these bikes.not much up on the newer stuff any how Mark.this what i have come to surmise.not an expert just an old hacker.i just go with what works for me.:huh:
Regards Paul

Mark, Just random thoughts, Early bikes with mild steel frames and small dia. forks/axles flexed (a lot) greater rake and longer wheelbases provided better high speed stability. (quite probably what was considered "handling" in the day.) Featherbed and Isoclastic frame to eng. mounting was the rage tho HP was usually in the 30-40 range, and the ability to reach the "ton" was respected. Quality tires of the time were roughly that of current chen-shin nankang kenda carcasses. Brakes were predominantly drum.. Merely suggestionsby todays standards. Stiff lightweight frames, Beefy forks/stansions and Huge gull-wing swingarms and smaller dia/ lightweight wheel/tires allow shorter wheelbases steeper head angles. resulting in quicker turning and high speed stability. steering dampers are still an opt, but when did you last hear of a "tank-slapper" sorry this sounds like a rant. Bye G

Thanks Gane that pretty well said it for me.and you hit the nail on the head.thanks
Regards Paul

i think of this everytime someone says tankslapper
(youtube)



....and i think of the 78 z-1r a friend and i had that was stripped down for a road warrior thingy...it would shake going through 110-115 and then calm down and then when you went back down thru 115-110 it would do it again....it would get your fellow riders attention as it needed most of a street lane to complete it's drama....