AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
- weeksy
- Site Admin
- Posts: 23431
- Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 12:08 pm
- Has thanked: 5453 times
- Been thanked: 13097 times
- Mr Moofo
- Posts: 4620
- Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 1:41 pm
- Location: Brightonish
- Has thanked: 1829 times
- Been thanked: 1469 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
I quite like that - other than the seat
-
- Posts: 445
- Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:41 am
- Has thanked: 255 times
- Been thanked: 143 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
The ss swingarm looks gash. Seat is awkward and the pipes look shit. Quite like the rest of it
- mangocrazy
- Posts: 6920
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 9:58 pm
- Has thanked: 2407 times
- Been thanked: 3636 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
I never can understand why builders tack a SSSA onto a bike that's trying to evoke cafe racers of the 50s and 60s. It's crass. It also adds unnecessary weight and complexity.porter_jamie wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:22 am The ss swingarm looks gash. Seat is awkward and the pipes look shit.
I have an Aprilia Falco that will go, steer, stop and handle at least as well as that (probably better) and it's probably lighter, as well.
Ho hum.
There is no cloud, just somebody else's computer.
- DefTrap
- Posts: 4504
- Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2020 8:23 am
- Has thanked: 2267 times
- Been thanked: 2193 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
Doesn't know what it wants to be really does it.? It's like someone had a go at tarting up a Hesketh.
The one with the wheelbarrow-handle exhausts made me laugh.
The one with the wheelbarrow-handle exhausts made me laugh.
- KungFooBob
- Posts: 14223
- Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2020 1:04 pm
- Location: The content of this post is not AI generated.
- Has thanked: 539 times
- Been thanked: 7539 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
Is it me, or does the gear change shaft go through the frame?
- MrLongbeard
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:06 pm
- Has thanked: 599 times
- Been thanked: 2450 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
They look cool, they are cool, they open up the back end, make pissing about (adjusting / aligning) with the chain 300% easier , for the sake of a handful of kg's I;d sooner a SSSA than the standard 2 pieces of angle iron of a regular swing armmangocrazy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 4:30 pmI never can understand why builders tack a SSSA onto a bike that's trying to evoke cafe racers of the 50s and 60s. It's crass. It also adds unnecessary weight and complexity.porter_jamie wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:22 am The ss swingarm looks gash. Seat is awkward and the pipes look shit.
I have an Aprilia Falco that will go, steer, stop and handle at least as well as that (probably better) and it's probably lighter, as well.
Ho hum.
- mangocrazy
- Posts: 6920
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 9:58 pm
- Has thanked: 2407 times
- Been thanked: 3636 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
30 years ago maybe, when they were (comparatively) new and in vogue. Now they're as common as muck. But if you like them, that's cool.MrLongbeard wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 6:55 pmThey look cool, they are cool,mangocrazy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 4:30 pmI never can understand why builders tack a SSSA onto a bike that's trying to evoke cafe racers of the 50s and 60s. It's crass. It also adds unnecessary weight and complexity.porter_jamie wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:22 am The ss swingarm looks gash. Seat is awkward and the pipes look shit.
I have an Aprilia Falco that will go, steer, stop and handle at least as well as that (probably better) and it's probably lighter, as well.
Ho hum.
I think you're confusing that with a centre stand. Now that does make chain adjustment easier. And ask RC36/46 VFR owners about the chain adjustment mechanism seizing up.MrLongbeard wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 6:55 pm they open up the back end, make pissing about (adjusting / aligning) with the chain 300% easier ,
Except it's not a handful of kgs, is it? Besides the extra weight of a SSSA there is also the extra frame bracing that's required due to the twisting forces involved.MrLongbeard wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 6:55 pm for the sake of a handful of kg's I;d sooner a SSSA than the standard 2 pieces of angle iron of a regular swing arm
There is no cloud, just somebody else's computer.
-
- Posts: 445
- Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:41 am
- Has thanked: 255 times
- Been thanked: 143 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
Ssa looks silly on this particular style of bike. A normal steel or even an ally pressed up section arm would look much better.
- MrLongbeard
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:06 pm
- Has thanked: 599 times
- Been thanked: 2450 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
Pretty much.
Speed triple SSSA 190kgs
KTM 1290 SUPER DUKE SSSA 190kgs
KTM 890 DUKE standard swinger 196kgs
Z1000 standard swinger 221kgs
GSXR S1000 standard swinger 202kgs
Yamaha MT-10 standard swinger 212kgs
indian ftr sport standard swinger 230kgs
All litre-ish, all nakeds, all within a couple of kg's of each other, having a SSSA does not have to mean heaver, hell even BMW say;
https://www.bmwmotorcycles.com/en/engin ... -in-detailCompared to conventional suspension with two swing arms, a single-sided swing-arm enables a saving on weight with higher torsional stiffness at the same time and remarkably simple installation and removal of the rear wheel.
For me they look better, so even if they added 25Kgs+ as an option I'd pick a SSSA, s'all personal taste
- mangocrazy
- Posts: 6920
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 9:58 pm
- Has thanked: 2407 times
- Been thanked: 3636 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
Some of those figures are way out. From the same website (https://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za) the KTM 1290 Super Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 189 kgs, the 890 Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 166kgs, so 23kgs difference in favour of a conventional swingarm. The Z1000, GSXS 1000 and MT10 quoted weights are all 'wet', so subtract at least 15-20kgs for a dry weight.
I fully understand it's down to personal preference - you like a SSSA, I'm not keen. I did actually own a bike with a SSSA - an RC36 VFR750, and the extra weight at the rear of the bike was noticeable when compared to the conventinal swingarm RC24 VFR750 it replaced. And there was a difference of 15kg as I recall between the two. Guess which was heaviest?
I fully understand it's down to personal preference - you like a SSSA, I'm not keen. I did actually own a bike with a SSSA - an RC36 VFR750, and the extra weight at the rear of the bike was noticeable when compared to the conventinal swingarm RC24 VFR750 it replaced. And there was a difference of 15kg as I recall between the two. Guess which was heaviest?
There is no cloud, just somebody else's computer.
- MrLongbeard
- Posts: 4597
- Joined: Sun Mar 15, 2020 2:06 pm
- Has thanked: 599 times
- Been thanked: 2450 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
You're quite right, I lazily pulled whatever Google threw at me.mangocrazy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:35 pm Some of those figures are way out. From the same website (https://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za) the KTM 1290 Super Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 189 kgs, the 890 Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 166kgs, so 23kgs difference in favour of a conventional swingarm. The Z1000, GSXS 1000 and MT10 quoted weights are all 'wet', so subtract at least 15-20kgs for a dry weight.
So dig a little deeper, and, accepting your check of the Z1000, GXS & MT10 are wet weights;mangocrazy wrote: ↑Tue Jul 18, 2023 9:35 pm From the same website (https://www.motorcyclespecs.co.za) the KTM 1290 Super Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 189 kgs, the 890 Duke R has a quoted dry weight of 166kgs, so 23kgs difference in favour of a conventional swingarm. The Z1000, GSXS 1000 and MT10 quoted weights are all 'wet', so subtract at least 15-20kgs for a dry weight.
Speed triple SSSA wet 198 (source Triumph)
KTM 1290 SUPER DUKE SSSA wet 200 (source Bennets)
KTM 890 DUKE standard swinger wet 183 (source KTM)
Z1000 standard swinger 221kgs
GSXR S1000 standard swinger 202kgs
Yamaha MT-10 standard swinger 212kgs
indian ftr sport standard swinger 230kgs
Both SSSA bikes weigh less than 3 of the 5 standard swingers, but must bear in mind the 890 duke is 400cc smaller and the GSXR is 200cc smaller than the 2 SSSA's, so much of a muchness.
Still, it could be worse, they could have been hubless..
- mangocrazy
- Posts: 6920
- Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2020 9:58 pm
- Has thanked: 2407 times
- Been thanked: 3636 times
Re: AN S&S CYCLE CAFÉ RACER THAT’S SO NICE, THEY BUILT IT TWICE
It's probably true to say that the weight difference between SSSA and conventional swingers has reduced, as manufacturers gain more experience and fine tune their FEA (Finite Element Analysis) models. Back in the early days (1990s) there was a large weight penalty, that does seem to have reduced. And comparing the KTMs, a parallel twin will always weigh less than an equivalent V-twin, so that will account for some of the difference. I reckon there is still a weight penalty for having a SSSA, but it's a lot less than it used to be.
There is no cloud, just somebody else's computer.