Front Spring Stiffeners Available

[Roadster Renovations]

Since returning in October from "Spyder in the Smokies", and with a brand new mod installed on my 2014 RTS, I have rode close to 1500 miles with them in place and these are going to work well. This particular mod stiffens part of the spring, making the suspension more firm. There is a way to set it at 3 different levels of stiffness. The package comes with 4 stiffeners (2 per side) and can be used in either (A) position (1 unit) or (B) position (2 units) The more aggressive (C) position will not be required by most riders. For that reason they were not included with the kit but can be ordered additionally. In my extensive open road and back road testing, including riding the Dragon twice 2 up with quite a few times the inner wheel briefly off the ground they did not shift position at all. The units install or remove in minutes and this model will work for all 2013-2015 RT models with non-adjustable front suspension. It does not reposition the shock angles from factory. I tried them on a 2013 model and the rider came back and reported that his suspension improvement was immediately apparent. These units are directly manufactured by me by hand and come with a lifetime warranty against defects. The standing height of my RT was raised about 1/2" overall and no headlight adjustment was required. This product is based upon decades-old automobile suspension technology adapted to work on the Spyder.

http://dochumphreys.wix.com/roadster

[DJFaninTN]

i might suggest a quick video of the installation so you could show how easy it is.

[Roadster Renovations]

I will do that!

[Dragonrider]

Are these only available via Amazon? Please PM me - thanx

[Roadster Renovations]

Here is a short video on the Spring Stiffeners.

[Highwayman2013]

Nice item looks like it's easy to install.

[sduskin]

Are these in addition to the sway bar? or instead of putting on a sway bar?

[Roadster Renovations]

Are these in addition to the sway bar? or instead of putting on a sway bar?

Well, I had a lot of Yaw on the bike going around corners. We also had a lot of turbulence when passing or getting passed by 18 wheelers. I installed Baja Ron's sway bar and was able to tell an immediate improvement n the passing 18 wheelers. Big difference. The sway bar did help with cornering, but it wasn't as stiff as I wanted it to be. We still had about 60% of that YAW motion like you were going to come off the bike. It was simply squatting too much to the outside in the corners. I did not notice it as much riding one up, but that was not my normally way of riding by about 95%.
At installing the stiffeners in the B position I found that the bike was much stiffer around corners. There was still Yaw, always will be with this type of ryde, but it was more in a factor of centrifugal force and not a soft suspension twisting the bike low on the outside.
i will tell you that the inner tire will leave the ground quicker on my setup, and that is understandable with stiffer springs, but I feel much more in control of the bike around curves now.
It's my guess that BRP made the front springs non-adjustable due to most of the ryders being more cruisers instead of performance ryders. It also allows the nanny more time to kick in with a softer suspension.
And, lastly, the springs should have been beefed up IMHO when they went to the heavier and wider 1330. The frame change is 2013 with the 998 had the same springs that are on the 2014 & 2015.
The closer the bike will be ridden to weight capacity, the more load on the springs, reducing the standing height, even causing negative camber, scraping during panic stops, even problems riding over curbs, etc..
I realize I really haven't answered your question very well, but in my opinion both products are excellent for what they do. If I had it to do over again, I would go with the sway bar also. If anyone ever removed their OEM sway bar and set it next to Ron's, there would be no doubt to change it. The OEM sway bar is a joke.

[NautiBrit]

And, lastly, the springs should have been beefed up IMHO when they went to the heavier and wider 1330. The frame change is 2013 with the 998 had the same springs that are on the 2014 & 2015.

The shocks on the 2013 are of a smaller diameter than those on the 2014 and 2015 and I'm guessing that the spring strength has been increased on the 1330 to compensate for the increased weight.

[Roadster Renovations]

The shocks on the 2013 are of a smaller diameter than those on the 2014 and 2015 and I'm guessing that the spring strength has been increased on the 1330 to compensate for the increased weight.

I checked them with a micrometer and they are the same thickness. I did not check diameter, but to the eye they look the same and if the diameter is different it is not much. You have aroused my curiosity though. I will make a trip up to my friends' and get a measurement in a few days on his '13. Just for giggles, I'll also get a spring height so we can compare the 13's.
Thanks for posting that!

[PMK]

2014 RT series front left & right spring PN: 706001830 SPRING

2014 RT series front left & right shock PN: 706001549 SHOCK

2014 RT series rear spring PN: 706001542 SHOCK ABSORBER SPRING

2014 RT series rear shock PN: 706001552 SHOCK ABSORBER


2013 RT series front left & right spring PN: 706001359 SPRING

2013 RT series front left & right shock PN: 706001235 SHOCK

2013 RT series rear spring PN: 706001263 SPRING

2013 RT series rear shock PN: 706001262 SHOCK

Something has changed, not sure exactly what. FWIW, the 2013 RT and what appears to be the STS share the same front springs.

PK

[Roadster Renovations]

You are right. Totally different numbers. As I said, the thickness of the coils are identical. I verified that with a micrometer several times. Only other thing can either be height or diameter unless they changed the composition on them and I doubt that. Thanks for posting.

[PMK]

You are right. Totally different numbers. As I said, the thickness of the coils are identical. I verified that with a micrometer several times. Only other thing can either be height or diameter unless they changed the composition on them and I doubt that. Thanks for posting.

Consider also, the rate of the spring is very dependent upon number of active coils and if there is any end conditioning. Number of active coils is and wire diameter are the main keys.

Measuring coil pitch is an easy way to compare with equal wire diameters.

The balance of a proper spring rate, proper preload, and suspension arm geometry is one formula for good handling.

PK

[Roadster Renovations]

Consider also, the rate of the spring is very dependent upon number of active coils and if there is any end conditioning. Number of active coils is and wire diameter are the main keys.

Measuring coil pitch is an easy way to compare with equal wire diameters.

The balance of a proper spring rate, proper preload, and suspension arm geometry is one formula for good handling.

PK

You know, PMK, since the shock number is different between them also, there may be several factors involved here. My initial research was just to make sure my stiffeners would work on the 2013. Has anyone ever come up with an actual weight difference, engine and trans, from the 998 and the 1330?

[Magdave]

IIRC the 2014 shock is a bit stiffer and made by a different source than the 2013 they are Sachs on the '14. Not sure who made the 13s but it is 1 possible upgrade to the 13 suspension the 14 shocks are plug and play and I believe have bigger pistons.

[Dragonrider]

Doc's new farkle may be the affordable option to keep the front of my Spyder off the pavement on rough roads. If so, it's solid gold.

[NautiBrit]

I checked them with a micrometer and they are the same thickness. I did not check diameter, but to the eye they look the same and if the diameter is different it is not much. You have aroused my curiosity though. I will make a trip up to my friends' and get a measurement in a few days on his '13. Just for giggles, I'll also get a spring height so we can compare the 13's.
Thanks for posting that!

My initial point referred to the shock and not the spring. It would be interesting to see if the spring has also changed. Thanks for following up and it looks like you have a very viable product.

[Roadster Renovations]

Got up to my friends' place and got some measurements on the differences on the front springs.

2013 - 7" total loaded height - Total number of coils = 8 - Outside diameter - 1.780 - Coil thickness - .0350

2014 - 7" total loaded height - Total number of coils = 7 - Outside diameter - 1.850 - Coil thickness - .0350

Looks like the '14 has a .070 wider diameter and one less coil.

Unless the shock has drastically changed and carries much more of the load, it seems to me a wider spring with the same thickness coil and less coils would give a softer ride. And it certainly doesn't allow for the heavier engine and trans. Still looking for the weight difference between the 998 and the 1330. I'm guessing at least 100-150 lbs.

Does anyone else see this differently?

[PMK]

Got up to my friends' place and got some measurements on the differences on the front springs.

2013 - 7" total loaded height - Total number of coils = 8 - Outside diameter - 1.780 - Coil thickness - .0350

2014 - 7" total loaded height - Total number of coils = 7 - Outside diameter - 1.850 - Coil thickness - .0350

Looks like the '14 has a .070 wider diameter and one less coil.

Unless the shock has drastically changed and carries much more of the load, it seems to me a wider spring with the same thickness coil and less coils would give a softer ride. And it certainly doesn't allow for the heavier engine and trans. Still looking for the weight difference between the 998 and the 1330. I'm guessing at least 100-150 lbs.

Does anyone else see this differently?

922 lbs/in

913 lbs/in

Honestly need free length for proper rate, but this compares the two springs based on 7.0. What you measured is static net force.

PK

[Roadster Renovations]

922 lbs/in

913 lbs/in

Honestly need free length for proper rate, but this compares the two springs based on 7.0. What you measured is static net force.

PK

So, PMK, what you are saying is the springs on the 2014 are SOFTER than the 2013 even though it has a heavier power plant? What engineering thought this would be a great idea?

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

So, PMK, what you are saying is the springs on the 2014 are SOFTER than the 2013 even though it has a heavier power plant? What engineering thought this would be a great idea?

...Probably the same one who told them to put the rear air valve on the wrong side of the rear wheel .....I thought they fired Him for that ...but I guess not .....................Mike

[spacetiger]

So, PMK, what you are saying is the springs on the 2014 are SOFTER than the 2013 even though it has a heavier power plant? What engineering thought this would be a great idea?

PK used the measurements to calculate a possible spring rate. You gave him all the necessary info except 1, the modules of rigidity of the materiel property of each spring. My guess is they are the same but you never know unless to test the actual spring and work it backwards. For what I see, they have comparable spring rates; 913 vs. 922.

As PK indicated, you need the free length of both springs before you say the newer springs are softer. to get this info, you would have to take the spring off the shock to measure the length of both springs. This is important as it tells you how much preload is placed on the spring.

Example:
Lets say the 2013 spring has a free length 7.15 inches and has a spring rate of 922 lbs/in. Once installed, the spring has a length of 7" (there are no preload adjustments). The preload would be (7.15 - 7.0) x 922 = 138.3 lbs. That means you would have to apply 138.3 lbs before the shock starts to compress.

If the 2014 spring had a free length of 7.2 inches and has a spring rate of 913 lb/in. Once installed, the spring has a length of 7". In this case, the preload would be (7.2 - 7.0) x 913 = 182.6 lbs. That is an extra 44.3 lbs of preload force per spring even. So, even though the 2014 spring has a slightly lower spring rate it is set up to outperform the 2013 spring as the extra 44.3 lbs of preload would carry over through out the working range of the shock.

BTW, there are a a few of us running much stiffer Eibach springs (500 and 550 lbs//in), Based on my experience, you need at least 450 lb/in springs.

Jerry

[PMK]

PK used the measurements to calculate a possible spring rate. You gave him all the necessary info except 1, the modules of rigidity of the materiel property of each spring. My guess is they are the same but you never know unless to test the actual spring and work it backwards. For what I see, they have comparable spring rates; 913 vs. 922.

As PK indicated, you need the free length of both springs before you say the newer springs are softer. to get this info, you would have to take the spring off the shock to measure the length of both springs. This is important as it tells you how much preload is placed on the spring.

Example:
Lets say the 2013 spring has a free length 7.15 inches and has a spring rate of 922 lbs/in. Once installed, the spring has a length of 7" (there are no preload adjustments). The preload would be (7.15 - 7.0) x 922 = 138.3 lbs. That means you would have to apply 138.3 lbs before the shock starts to compress.

If the 2014 spring had a free length of 7.2 inches and has a spring rate of 913 lb/in. Once installed, the spring has a length of 7". In this case, the preload would be (7.2 - 7.0) x 913 = 182.6 lbs. That is an extra 44.3 lbs of preload force per spring even. So, even though the 2014 spring has a slightly lower spring rate it is set up to outperform the 2013 spring as the extra 44.3 lbs of preload would carry over through out the working range of the shock.

BTW, there are a a few of us running much stiffer Eibach springs (500 and 550 lbs//in), Based on my experience, you need at least 450 lb/in springs.

Jerry

Agee 100%. I simply dropped values into a rate calculator. Chose a material and got a value. I did not have fr=e length, so the rate is simply a general comparison.

As mentioned, much more than rate.

PK

[Roadster Renovations]

Thanks for the clarification. I am not going to take the springs on my bike apart, let alone ask my friend to take his apart to get the measurement. I have satisfied my curiosity that even though they are a different part, and the diameter varies slightly, they are close enough to be considered comparable.I *would*like to know the difference in weight between the 998 and 1330 engines and transmissions.

[Tango]

Too much math being taught here. Tom