RAM-MOTO "Stealth" Turbo project

As it says; what you've done to your bike and how it helped make it better.

Moderators: Paul, slparry, Gromit

User avatar England
beachcomber
Posts: 193
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:10 pm
Location: Redditch UK and Reichenau Saxony
Contact:

RAM-MOTO "Stealth" Turbo project

Postby beachcomber » Wed Nov 25, 2015 9:49 am

The ST has now been divested of most of it's fuggly. :wink:. Just the front end and tailpiece to remove.

This view has given us a good idea as to possible packaging of the turbo [s] and associated squitter. I have a picture in my mind of the bodystyle, but as a trained draughstman - I am no artist !! So, we'll resort to the traditional cardboard and tape "Blue Peter" approach - something we've got used to in the past 45 years or so ! :lol:

I have some rough sketches of the direction we will take - the idea is to create something that defies pigeon holing [ another Marmite ! ]

One thing that is immediately apparent is the angle of the Telelever looks noticeably steeper than the R1100S ?????

I'll put them both [ S and ST ] on the jig and try to get a precise measurement for the "why" question.

I'll also be looking at the Paralever strut to see if our current "RAMLEVER" [ R1100S etc. models ] can be used / modified for the later range of models.


Image
"if at first you don't succeed - you've already been a failure once"

User avatar Great Britain
The Teutonic Tangerine
Posts: 1565
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 3:18 pm
Location: Essex
Contact:

Postby The Teutonic Tangerine » Wed Nov 25, 2015 11:07 am

I had an 1100S and have a 1200ST - if you read the specs for them they are very similar - ie weight wheelbase etc. But the ST does steer quicker that the S. This may be down to the fatter fork legs ie less flex when tipping in.Or you may be right and the steering angle is steeper. I do think that the S had a better "Frame" it never wiggled in corners but the ST does when pushed hard. The "frames" are quite different in design and the fatter front end may show up the less rigid back end on the ST. Perhaps any wallowing on the 1100 was absorbed by the flexibiliity of the forks.

Sorry for the non technical language but these are my impessions having done 50,0000 miles on the 1100s and about 36,000 on the ST.
There would appear to be a surfeit of prolixity and sesquipedalian content today please do not use a big word when a singularly un-loquacious and diminutive linguistic expression will satisfactorily accomplish the contemporary necessity

User avatar England
beachcomber
Posts: 193
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 6:10 pm
Location: Redditch UK and Reichenau Saxony
Contact:

Postby beachcomber » Wed Nov 25, 2015 5:46 pm

The Teutonic Tangerine wrote:I had an 1100S and have a 1200ST - if you read the specs for them they are very similar - ie weight wheelbase etc. But the ST does steer quicker that the S. This may be down to the fatter fork legs ie less flex when tipping in.Or you may be right and the steering angle is steeper. I do think that the S had a better "Frame" it never wiggled in corners but the ST does when pushed hard. The "frames" are quite different in design and the fatter front end may show up the less rigid back end on the ST. Perhaps any wallowing on the 1100 was absorbed by the flexibiliity of the forks.

Sorry for the non technical language but these are my impessions having done 50,0000 miles on the 1100s and about 36,000 on the ST.


Thanx for the feedback. Real World experiences always welcomed.

We are currently looking at a rear frame that will be similar to the S, but will fit all models.

My first non techinical assessment is that the Telelever angle is indeed steeper, but I'll check in the real World of measurement, rather than gut feeling.
"if at first you don't succeed - you've already been a failure once"


Return to “Boxerspex”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests