- Posts: 7596
- Thank you received: 2248
KZ550C LTD Fork Oil Measurement.
- TexasKZ
- Offline
- Platinum Member
1982 KZ1000 LTD parts donor
1981 KZ1000 LTD awaiting resurrection
2000 ZRX1100 not ridden enough
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- loudhvx
- Offline
- KZr Legend
- Posts: 10868
- Thank you received: 1616
1981 KZ550 D1 gpz.
Kz550 valve train warning.
Other links.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- The_Proletariat
- Topic Author
- Offline
- User
- "Cocaine is a hell of a drug"
- Posts: 269
- Thank you received: 13
Motor oil does vary from the viscosity printed on the bottle, and the viscosity does change as the oil ages in the engine. An easily noticeable example of this is how shifting gets progressively worse between oil changes. I call it "notchy" shifting.
When shifting is no longer smooth, I adjust the clutch and change the oil. Smooth shifting again.
1982 Kawasaki KZ550 LTD
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- loudhvx
- Offline
- KZr Legend
- Posts: 10868
- Thank you received: 1616
www.kzrider.com/forum/5-chassis/595286-1...l-level?limitstart=0
1981 KZ550 D1 gpz.
Kz550 valve train warning.
Other links.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- LouisDePasquale1980KZ550C
- Offline
- User
- Posts: 11
- Thank you received: 3
The_Proletariat wrote:
loudhvx wrote: I think this has come up a few times in the past, and there was no resolution that I can recall.
It does seem inconsistent that the C model has such a high volume of oil, but such a short height-clearance measurment.
It has. There are a couple threads about this on this forum, and on other forums. Some suggest to use the height measurement, some suggest to use the fluid volume measurement.
I can offer my experience, perhaps this can be some resolution.
I rode for a week with the specified height measurement of 14''. I was afraid to ride the bike. The front end was very tight and very twitchy and there was almost zero weight transfer when braking with the front brake. The ride was terrible and I was afraid to lean in case a bump in the road upset the now nearly rigid chassis.
I drained the oil and refilled with 300ml of oil. Yes, over the spec but I can measure nearly exactly 300ml. I cannot measure nearly exactly 270 or 290 ml and I wanted the forks to be as equally filled as possible.
After this the bike feels much better. Does not bottom out even with my fat ass on the bike but it is tight enough to be confident to really push in turns. Enough weight transfer under braking to really get on the front brake. In the future I will ignore the FSM 14" height measurement and go by the volume measurement.
Possible error in both manuals?
What If the measurement should be 556mm instead of 356mm?
I feel there is a good possibility this is it. A significant amount of oil needs to be added after the initial fill of 270/290ml to reach the 14'' height measurement.
Following this info, today I used 10oz (295ml) of fork oil. The measurement with a fully extended fork and no spring is 19.75 inches.
1980 KZ550 C1 LTD
Central New York
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- loudhvx
- Offline
- KZr Legend
- Posts: 10868
- Thank you received: 1616
LouisDePasquale1980KZ550C wrote:
The_Proletariat wrote:
loudhvx wrote: I think this has come up a few times in the past, and there was no resolution that I can recall.
It does seem inconsistent that the C model has such a high volume of oil, but such a short height-clearance measurment.
It has. There are a couple threads about this on this forum, and on other forums. Some suggest to use the height measurement, some suggest to use the fluid volume measurement.
I can offer my experience, perhaps this can be some resolution.
I rode for a week with the specified height measurement of 14''. I was afraid to ride the bike. The front end was very tight and very twitchy and there was almost zero weight transfer when braking with the front brake. The ride was terrible and I was afraid to lean in case a bump in the road upset the now nearly rigid chassis.
I drained the oil and refilled with 300ml of oil. Yes, over the spec but I can measure nearly exactly 300ml. I cannot measure nearly exactly 270 or 290 ml and I wanted the forks to be as equally filled as possible.
After this the bike feels much better. Does not bottom out even with my fat ass on the bike but it is tight enough to be confident to really push in turns. Enough weight transfer under braking to really get on the front brake. In the future I will ignore the FSM 14" height measurement and go by the volume measurement.
Possible error in both manuals?
What If the measurement should be 556mm instead of 356mm?
I feel there is a good possibility this is it. A significant amount of oil needs to be added after the initial fill of 270/290ml to reach the 14'' height measurement.
Following this info, today I used 10oz (295ml) of fork oil. The measurement with a fully extended fork and no spring is 19.75 inches.
That's great. Thank you for the update. That'll help others know what to do.
1981 KZ550 D1 gpz.
Kz550 valve train warning.
Other links.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- 650ed
- Offline
- User
- Posts: 15344
- Thank you received: 2829
1977 KZ650-C1 Original Owner - Stock (with additional invisible FIAMM horn)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- loudhvx
- Offline
- KZr Legend
- Posts: 10868
- Thank you received: 1616
This image is from the red base manual which covers the 1979 Kz500. It is from the appendix supplement for the 1980 model Kz550's and has a Kz550C-specific section for forks on the Kz550C model Ltd (which are much longer than the standard model).
As many users found, the measurement is way off, and does not agree with the volume. Different models/years use different volumes and distance measurements, so we are trying to narrow down a workable volume/distance value.
The white base manual (FSM) has basically the same information.
Model ...... Volume .. Height-Clearance Level
79 500B1 : 220cc : 505mm
80 400J1 : 220cc : 505mm
80 500B2 : 220cc : 505mm
80 550A1 : 220cc : 505mm
80 550B1 : 220cc : 505mm
80 550C1 : 290cc : 356mm
81 400J2 : 245cc : 520mm
81 500B3 : 245cc : 520mm
81 550A2 : 245cc : 520mm
81 550B2 : 245cc : 520mm
81 550C2 : 290cc : 356mm
81 550D1 : 244cc : 517mm
82 400J3 : 245cc : 520mm
82 500B4 : 245cc : 520mm
82 550A3 : 245cc : 520mm
82 550B3 : 245cc : 520mm
82 550C3 : 290cc : 356mm
82 550H1 : 234cc : 489mm
1981 KZ550 D1 gpz.
Kz550 valve train warning.
Other links.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- 650ed
- Offline
- User
- Posts: 15344
- Thank you received: 2829
Very interesting; I stand corrected as I now see the supplemental information for the āCā model. Does the bike in question have the air adjustable forks? Ed
1977 KZ650-C1 Original Owner - Stock (with additional invisible FIAMM horn)
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- loudhvx
- Offline
- KZr Legend
- Posts: 10868
- Thank you received: 1616
yes, I believe that is when all of the 400/500/550 family forks changed, when they switched over to air.650ed wrote: Loudhvx -
Very interesting; I stand corrected as I now see the supplemental information for the āCā model. Does the bike in question have the air adjustable forks? Ed
1981 KZ550 D1 gpz.
Kz550 valve train warning.
Other links.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.