thundercat rider Posted May 18, 2009 Report Share Posted May 18, 2009 Everywhere I read rave reviews about Showa's Big Piston Fork (BPF). Especially the lack of initial dive when braking gets lots of kudos. Anyone care to explain if it's a hype or if they're really better than a good cartridge usd fork? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparx55 Posted May 21, 2009 Report Share Posted May 21, 2009 Everywhere I read rave reviews about Showa's Big Piston Fork (BPF). Especially the lack of initial dive when braking gets lots of kudos. Anyone care to explain if it's a hype or if they're really better than a good cartridge usd fork? I've a feeling it may be a race application thingy, I ve heard folks saying they are rather harsh on the road, personally I'd prefere to stick with the well developed technology I know and understand. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lorenzo Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 I know this might come accross like I'm a bit of a luddite, but I wonder how much of these innovations amount to being another 'anti-dive' or something, where it's the next big thing one year and yesterdays technology the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomfoolery Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Especially when BMW have recently stated about their S1000R 'it's better to dive on the brakes, it alters the geometry of the bike for the better in corners'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liamo Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Especially the lack of initial dive when braking gets lots of kudos. Especially when BMW have recently stated about their S1000R 'it's better to dive on the brakes, it alters the geometry of the bike for the better in corners'... Maybe it does still dive to alter the geometry and i prove turn-in, but itys just that the initial dive is reduced? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coose Posted May 22, 2009 Report Share Posted May 22, 2009 Whilst at Reactive before Christmas I asked Gareth if the big piston forks were simply an updated version of my 1972 Yamaha XS-2 forks. He said yes, and that the first thing he'd be doing is lobbing the internals in a skip and fitting cartridges. It's simply a cost-cutting exercise.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tootall Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 Got a couple of mates racing the new zx6 this year and they're well impressed with the front end. Mickael hasn't even had a revalve done and he's running 5th in the Promosport 600 championship this year. Cant be all bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
will#224 Posted May 23, 2009 Report Share Posted May 23, 2009 the latest ohlins race fork is a big piston set up isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suspensionsmith Posted May 24, 2009 Report Share Posted May 24, 2009 the latest ohlins race fork is a big piston set up isn't it? If you mean the latest FGR gas forks,they use a piston of 20mm, hence why they are termed TTX20 which is the same piston size as most forks we see in our road bikes.The difference is the way in which they displace oil to generate damping.Although i think ohlins also field a TTX25 as well. As for the big piston fork i am still on the fence for that one,it may be a case of great idea,poor execution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David W Posted May 24, 2009 Report Share Posted May 24, 2009 I'm happy to be convinced otherwise, but I still think it's cost-cutting being marketed as performance enhancement. I'm sure it shares some technology with the Ohlins and Showa stuff used on GP bikes but I really do doubt they are there for the same reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thundercat rider Posted May 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted May 24, 2009 Well Guy Martin was positive about them in last months issue I believe. Maybe we should wait how many turn op on ebay. When showa says it simpler I'm more inclined to believe they did it because it's cheaper. To me it feels a bit like all those die cast frames. They're supposed to be cheaper and stiffer because they require far less welds. But if the japanese had their frame tig welded instead of robot-mig welding them, they'd be stiffer and stronger as well (and more expensive of course). If you look at the nineties japanese stuff, welds that aren't in plain sight are truly awful. That's typical cost cutting. From what bike breakers keep telling is the new japanese frames don't crash very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparx55 Posted May 24, 2009 Report Share Posted May 24, 2009 Well Guy Martin was positive about them in last months issue I believe. Maybe we should wait how many turn op on ebay. When showa says it simpler I'm more inclined to believe they did it because it's cheaper. To me it feels a bit like all those die cast frames. They're supposed to be cheaper and stiffer because they require far less welds. But if the japanese had their frame tig welded instead of robot-mig welding them, they'd be stiffer and stronger as well (and more expensive of course). If you look at the nineties japanese stuff, welds that aren't in plain sight are truly awful. That's typical cost cutting. From what bike breakers keep telling is the new japanese frames don't crash very well. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm This has the makings of a conspiracy theory, having said that, I've seen Ducati welds that must have been done by 'Santa's ' apprentice whilst hiding behind the 'Grassy Knoll' and chatting to Elvis !!!!!!!! If you see what I mean . Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suspensionsmith Posted May 25, 2009 Report Share Posted May 25, 2009 The new forks look to be simpler which is progress in my book.As long as they provide a performance improvment. One of the things i have noticed about standard suspension as we see it from the factorys is the designers design in some degree of safety factor or redundency in case something fails,shims for example. Which seems to me be why some designs come with very restrictive valve port designs,so the shims cant be overstressed or if they do fail then the port is the backup. Problem is this impacts on the performance potential of the design.The more complex a design is the more compromises that might have to be made. I would hope the simplicity of the big piston fork reduces these compromises. Again the shims as an example.Because the larger piston is displacing a larger amount of oil in order to generate a given level of damping,the dynamic pressures,stresses on the oil/shims should be less.......thats my take on it so far. One thing i do like about the BPF is its something new/different and so very interesting. Sparx55 i think you may be right about it being mostly for a race application,so it may be compromised against a decent road setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.