Jump to content
  • 0

Delinking Left front brake, vfr800 2001,anybody tried this?


falken

Question

Has anybody tried this?,  does it work?

 

Delinking vfr 800, 2001,  brakes.

Problem; I want to get rid of left front brake SMC and assy. (do not ask me why)

I have this foolish idea, which needs your confirmation, that it can be done.

Solution;

Remove left front fork case/casing and replace it with another (same as existing right fork)  right fork casing.

Remove  front left brake SMC and assy (no.06454MBG415) from the front left brake and replace it with rear brake sub assy (no. 06432MBG405). Fits perfectly. tried it.

Bolt now the left front brake with rear brake sub assy to fork casing. (Have not tried this since I do not have an exstra right fork casing)

Done, only problem I can see is that bolting the front fender on the right fork casing,needs spacers.

Does it work/fit?  As far as I have measured it should fit. 

Has anybody tried this?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • Member Contributer

Although your idea looks good on paper, it will not work on execution. The left fork slider has a larger opening for the axle, which is also part spacer if you will. So using a right fork slider would mean you would need to provide a new axle or modify the one you have.

 

If I am not mistaken, I believe that the de-link can be done with stock hardware but does require some modification to the left caliper/SMC. This would be creating a link between the main front hose and the hose that feeds from the rear system on the caliper, essentially a short jumper hose. Then disabling the SMC plunger but retaining its mounting points. I say this how to do it because I recall seeing this method posted before but cannot remember if it was someone on VFRD or VFRW. Maybe it was on both sites, can’t remember for sure though. Maybe someone who has done what you’re looking to do or has seen or done the method I described above will chime in. Hang tight I’m sure other suggestions will roll in soon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
3 hours ago, falken said:

Has anybody tried this?,  does it work?

 

..... (do not ask me why)

I have this foolish idea.....

 

 

I can't let you get away with that. 

 

Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Skids said:

 

I can't let you get away with that. 

 

Why?

The PCV is not working and brake lines are old, so I am  thinking of delinking and using fewer, but new brake lines and getting rid og of the SMC. But it looks like I have to disable and keep the SMC if I delink. Maybe it is just  a bad idea to delink.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Duc2V4 said:

Although your idea looks good on paper, it will not work on execution. The left fork slider has a larger opening for the axle, which is also part spacer if you will. So using a right fork slider would mean you would need to provide a new axle or modify the one you have.

 

If I am not mistaken, I believe that the de-link can be done with stock hardware but does require some modification to the left caliper/SMC. This would be creating a link between the main front hose and the hose that feeds from the rear system on the caliper, essentially a short jumper hose. Then disabling the SMC plunger but retaining its mounting points. I say this how to do it because I recall seeing this method posted before but cannot remember if it was someone on VFRD or VFRW. Maybe it was on both sites, can’t remember for sure though. Maybe someone who has done what you’re looking to do or has seen or done the method I described above will chime in. Hang tight I’m sure other suggestions will roll in soon.

You hit the nail, I did not think about that the left fork slider has a larger opening for the axle, which means I have to make  a custom made axle  or modify the fork.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
1 hour ago, falken said:

The PCV is not working and brake lines are old, so I am  thinking of delinking and using fewer, but new brake lines and getting rid og of the SMC. But it looks like I have to disable and keep the SMC if I delink. Maybe it is just  a bad idea to delink.

3

 

May be easier to add CBR600F3 fork lowers (same tube diameter as 5th Gen).

 

You can then utilize Superhawk (VTR1000) brake calipers or F3 brake calipers.  IIRC you can also use the RC51 (RVT1000) calipers with a small amount of grinding to clearance the caliper.

 

Then just either drill the rear or have a short link made to activate the rear caliper.  You can remove the PCV and all associated plumbing.

 

EDIT: may be Superhawk fork lowers that we used, not F3...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

I haven't measured, but I'm pretty sure that the caliper mounting lugs are not centred, so if you use the right on the left, you would have to add spacers for the caliper as well (which is not a place where I'd really want to add spacers and longer bolts, personally).

 

You can change just the main front brake lines right now, and reap most of the benefits that flow from fitting new brake lines.  The brake lever is connected directly to the two outer pistons on each front caliper, so if you disconnect all of the DCBS stuff you can ignore the middle pistons in the front caliper.  To stop the SMC from functioning, fit a 1-2mm stainless steel plate to the existing bolts, thus locking the SMC and the caliper bracket in place.  Then you would have a bodged-but-functional, conventional two-piston front caliper front braking system.  To use the two "extra" pistons as well would mean having to deal with drilling the calipers or looping the lines and swapping the master cylinder--probably not worth the effort.

 

However, because it would no longer be connected to the SMC, the rear caliper would require a new rear master cylinder (from a CBR600F4i, I believe).

 

Or swap the forks, as mentioned above (but the same rear caliper changes would have to be made).

 

Ciao,

 

JZH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
3 hours ago, CornerCarver said:

 

May be easier to add CBR600F3 fork lowers (same tube diameter as 5th Gen).

 

You can then utilize Superhawk (VTR1000) brake calipers or F3 brake calipers.  IIRC you can also use the RC51 (RVT1000) calipers with a small amount of grinding to clearance the caliper.

 

Then just either drill the rear or have a short link made to activate the rear caliper.  You can remove the PCV and all associated plumbing.

 

EDIT: may be Superhawk fork lowers that we used, not F3...

Superhawk lowers will mate up simple with the VFR upper tubes. Then you have bolt on possibilities of calipers - RC51/954/F4i and others. I have done this and quite few other VFR guys. - then you can rip out all the hose lines related to the linked up brakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

Another possibility is CBR F4I forks with 6th Gen triple clamps and clip-ons.  I've done this and its easy peasy.  CBR F4I brake calipers work fine.

 

Matt

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks to all of you for your advice and I can see there lots of ways of delinking with good results.

 Here in Denmark, regulations for modifying your bike are very strict. Major changes in suspension and brakes  require a new MOT with tests and documentation and maybe written  acceptance from Honda especially if you use parts from another bike  or parts changing the major performance of the bike.

If you do not do a new MOT (which a lot af Danes never do, after modifing their bikes) your insurance may not be valid and the police can give a fine and/or take the bike.  If you sell the bike  and the new owner crashes you can be held responsible, if you have made major modifications without a new MOT.  Definition to what you can change/modify to your bike without a MOT is stated in the Danish law, which I have to follow.

Just delinking the brakes ( new brake lines ) and using the original brakes and suspension is I think and hope is within the law and does not require a new MOT, or maybe a new MOT only for the brakes and is what I am thinking of doing. I should have written  this much before, sorry about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, JZH said:

I haven't measured, but I'm pretty sure that the caliper mounting lugs are not centred, so if you use the right on the left, you would have to add spacers for the caliper as well (which is not a place where I'd really want to add spacers and longer bolts, personally).

 

You can change just the main front brake lines right now, and reap most of the benefits that flow from fitting new brake lines.  The brake lever is connected directly to the two outer pistons on each front caliper, so if you disconnect all of the DCBS stuff you can ignore the middle pistons in the front caliper.  To stop the SMC from functioning, fit a 1-2mm stainless steel plate to the existing bolts, thus locking the SMC and the caliper bracket in place.  Then you would have a bodged-but-functional, conventional two-piston front caliper front braking system.  To use the two "extra" pistons as well would mean having to deal with drilling the calipers or looping the lines and swapping the master cylinder--probably not worth the effort.

 

However, because it would no longer be connected to the SMC, the rear caliper would require a new rear master cylinder (from a CBR600F4i, I believe).

 

Or swap the forks, as mentioned above (but the same rear caliper changes would have to be made).

 

Ciao,

 

JZH

I just bought a used right fork slider from England for 25£ , and I will bore the axle hole to 25 mm so the front axle will fit.  then I will  test if the rear caliper mounting lug fit, if they don´t it is only 25 £ I lose. Then  I think I will follow your and others advice of delinking but keeping the orginal suspension and brakes.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
11 hours ago, falken said:

Thanks to all of you for your advice and I can see there lots of ways of delinking with good results.

 Here in Denmark, regulations for modifying your bike are very strict. Major changes in suspension and brakes  require a new MOT with tests and documentation and maybe written  acceptance from Honda especially if you use parts from another bike  or parts changing the major performance of the bike.

If you do not do a new MOT (which a lot af Danes never do, after modifing their bikes) your insurance may not be valid and the police can give a fine and/or take the bike.  If you sell the bike  and the new owner crashes you can be held responsible, if you have made major modifications without a new MOT.  Definition to what you can change/modify to your bike without a MOT is stated in the Danish law, which I have to follow.

Just delinking the brakes ( new brake lines ) and using the original brakes and suspension is I think and hope is within the law and does not require a new MOT, or maybe a new MOT only for the brakes and is what I am thinking of doing. I should have written  this much before, sorry about that.

 

You lot are light years beyond our Transportation Authorities if you have a MOT inspector who can tell the difference between a 41mm 5G VFR lower and 41mm Superhawk lower...or the F4i lowers with 6G triples.

 

If your concern is litigation post sale switching to a brake system that functions as compared to the state of your brakes from your OP would be beneficial but I would return them to stock before selling.

 

If litigation is a concern I would also return the brakes to stock form from the modifications you indicate you plan to make before selling.  The difference would be that in the interim (during your ownership) you have brakes that actually work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, CornerCarver said:

 

You lot are light years beyond our Transportation Authorities if you have a MOT inspector who can tell the difference between a 41mm 5G VFR lower and 41mm Superhawk lower...or the F4i lowers with 6G triples.

 

If your concern is litigation post sale switching to a brake system that functions as compared to the state of your brakes from your OP would be beneficial but I would return them to stock before selling.

 

If litigation is a concern I would also return the brakes to stock form from the modifications you indicate you plan to make before selling.  The difference would be that in the interim (during your ownership) you have brakes that actually work.

I doubt that the Danish MOT inspectors can also see the differences, but without their approval (you are obliged to notify them of the modification) and if the modification is not  stated in the MOT register, it is illegal. If you crash and lets sat you are invalid from the waíst down, and the police and insurance company finds out you have modified the brakes without MOT approval, you will not get a cent. Let me state you are allowed to modify your brakes to the better in Denmark, that is not the problem, it is the documentation to MOT that is the burden.  Your are right about making the brakes to original when selling is the right thing to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

I see your quandary.

 

How would they look upon brakes that are already approved for use on other motorbikes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CornerCarver said:

I see your quandary.

 

How would they look upon brakes that are already approved for use on other motorbikes?

The Danish law says you can change brakes equal or better than the orginal from a similar orginal bike but it has to be complete (Incl. master cylinders) and must be a bolt on process. Then it must be approved by MOT but with only documentation from which bike it came from. All other variations must be extensive documented and tested before MOT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

WOW, and we just did away with all inspections (MOT) in my state last year, bikes and cars....... Pay money for registration and ride/drive.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Far out... No safety-technical inspections for deeming vehicles roadworthy in your state? Tell me which state that is to avoid driving there in heavy traffic...

 

Sorry to be off topic!

 

WOW, and we just did away with all inspections (MOT) in my state last year, bikes and cars....... Pay money for registration and ride/drive.....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
14 hours ago, Auspanglish said:

Far out... No safety-technical inspections for deeming vehicles roadworthy in your state? Tell me which state that is to avoid driving there in heavy traffic...

 

LOL :) i feel the same way, but there are actually 36 states in the USA that have no safety inspection required, cars or bikes....... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer
On 10/12/2018 at 5:39 AM, Auspanglish said:

Eee gad!!

And yet we Americans manage to drive billions of miles a year...and the EU a everage auto death rate is 9.3 and US is 10.6...per 100,000.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet we Americans manage to drive billions of miles a year...and the EU a everage auto death rate is 9.3 and US is 10.6...per 100,000.  

Interesting statistics, which, due to their extreme similarity and utter lack of statistically significant difference, would appear to imply that the existence or otherwise of roadworthy checks on vehicles makes no difference in the level of safety between driving in either country (sic).  Nonetheless, call me loco, the voices in my head tell me there must be further variables involved in road safety indicator stats, and thus I might be so daring as to venture a possible hypothesis in that technical inspections in Europe may act as a compensatory factor for other notably lacking features otherwise present in the USA, such as width of lanes, separation between opposing traffic, state of asphalt, visibility at intersections (often no sidewalks or very narrow ones in Europe), speed limits, policing of the streets and highways, driving tendencies and culture (respect for law and other drivers), etc.

 

In other words, that very interesting statistical data on its own doesn't prove not having roadworthy inspections has no impact. Common sense and the laws of physics and mechanics would suggest it must do.

 

I wonder what the value for that statistic is in Australia where they share the USA's advantageous physical and spatial conditions as well as Europe's roadworthy inspections (they also tend to have lower speed limits and a more laid back attitude, less road rage and anxiety, etc.). Again all variables should be taken into account. But just looking at their stats in the present limited context one might want to assume that auto deaths per 100,000 would be lower... and lo and behold, it is... and this time significantly so:

 

 d98b192a460069bee950cb171e720380.jpg&key=ea223355d96b7e66c1f36ead1e9ea88ef13384f2426afc329ab543a65d4f659b

 

I myself have driven the length and breadth of the USA and Europe and can only say the conditions in the USA seemed much safer, in Europe you often feel you're in a rally on supernarrow constantly weaving roads squeezing your way between other vehicles and buildings with very little visibility of what's around the bend and cars bumper to bumper with no respect for speed limits and very little police presence.

 

Anyway this is surely way off topic.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

Of course...we could also factor in average miles driven...and US drivers would be behind Australia, slightly, and ahead of the EU...if we look at road deaths per mi or per km per 100,000.  Americans drive on average significantly more than Australians or EU counterparts.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, zupatun said:

Of course...we could also factor in average miles driven...and US drivers would be behind Australia, slightly, and ahead of the EU...if we look at road deaths per mi or per km per 100,000.  Americans drive on average significantly more than Australians or EU counterparts.  

 

....and yet their death toll pero 100,000 is neither significantly higher nor lower... anyway, it's far more complex than that... but I see no reason to "tempt fate" unecessarily with no checks... then again I could be accused of patronizing a nanny state... Anarchy in the UK!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member Contributer

Checks are good...

Samuel Longhorn Clemens "There are three types of lies. Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy.