Alignment results.

[MartinRedcoat]

Bought my new 2016 RT Ltd 2 months ago, and had the 3000 mile service carried out yesterday. Having read many excellent posts on this forum, I asked the dealer to perform the laser alignment. The results were; front 1/4" toe in , should be 3/4", and rear was 1 1/2 " off center to the left. The bike now handles as if on rails; my question is, was this result "off" by more than normal (especially the rear) or is this the norm for a new bike?

TIA

 

[SpyderAnn01]

None of those numbers or descriptions make any sense.

 

[SpyderAnn01]

The front targets are set 75" from the laser. The rear targets are set at a distance based on a calculation using the track width. When they set the rear targets that tells you how far out you are on each side. While the tech adjusts one side of the bike he uses the front target on the other side as a place holder. When he has adjusted his side to the centerline of the rear target the front target on that side is moved to center and the process is repeated on the other side.

 

[GearHd]

I think a lot of dealers use the "baffle em with BS" motto on their customers because they think they don't know any better.

 

[Bob Denman]

:agree: But I can tell you that when Ron Netzley did the alignment on mine: it was almost close enough, to be within the specifications... :thumbup:

...Almost! :shocked:

(I kind of liked his simple explanation!)

 

[BajaRon]

None of those numbers or descriptions make any sense.

:agree: :thumbup:

I think a lot of dealers use the "baffle em with BS" motto on their customers because they think they don't know any better.

:agree: AGAIN! :thumbup::thumbup:

 

[Petsure]

I had my 2015 RT done last week at Spyder Quest along with sway bars and shock adjusters, what a huge difference in the ride, no longer dipping in turns.

 

[Pampurrs]

I think a lot of dealers use the "baffle em with BS" motto on their customers because they think they don't know any better.

:agree:

 

[wanderingman]

None of those numbers or descriptions make any sense.

I have done many alignments of different types of equipment. Martin Red Coates statement makes total sense. He is stating the condition his trike was found in, in relation to the datum, which should be the frame or more correctly the chassis. SpyderAnn your statement is providing the method used to perform the test and the necessary correction. The two statements are not in contradiction with each other. Simply statements of two different facts. IMHO the person who did MartinRedCoates alignment was correct by getting the rear wheel aligned to the frame in addition to getting the front wheels aligned correctly.

 

[BajaRon]

I have done many alignments of different types of equipment. Martin Red Coates statement makes total sense. He is stating the condition his trike was found in, in relation to the datum, which should be the frame or more correctly the chassis. SpyderAnn your statement is providing the method used to perform the test and the necessary correction. The two statements are not in contradiction with each other. Simply statements of two different facts. IMHO the person who did MartinRedCoates alignment was correct by getting the rear wheel aligned to the frame in addition to getting the front wheels aligned correctly.

Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly. But as far as I can see. We are still talking apples and oranges and there is no correlation.

You cannot align the rear wheel of the Spyder to the frame unless you also change the relationship between the front pulley (read Engine) and the frame. If you try to align rear wheel to the frame there is virtually no chance that the belt will track correctly on the pulleys. There is no way the dealership did that. Frame referenced alignments are a total waste of time on the Spyder. This has been know for a very long time. But it does not mean that it isn't still being used. Especially by dealerships.

When talking alignment on the Spyder, completely forget the frame. The frame does not even enter into the equation. Instead, the rear wheel is adjusted (or aligned) so the belt runs correctly on the pulleys. So, you are aligning the rear pulley to the front pullet. Not the frame.

Once this is done the front wheels are aligned with the rear wheel. The idea being everything that touches the ground (the 3 tires) are in correct alignment. This is the only way to get a proper alignment. And the ROLO laser system is the best way to achieve this.

 

[Bob Denman]

As long as the O.P.'s bike is handling better: :clap: :2thumbs:
Alignments might be like making sausage: it's best that you only worry about the end-product, and NOT watch it being made! :shocked:

 

[jcthorne]

I thing what the OP is actually referring to is more correctly known as skew. IE the alignment difference between the centerline angle of the front wheels vs the rear. The Rolo Laser alignment method as described by Ann, corrects exactly this. The confusion is that the front wheels are aligned so as to point in the direction aligned with the rear, plus the correct toe either side of this center line. The DPS and steering sensors are then reset to match this new center line / thrust line. There is no adjustment of the rear wheel, its only aligned with the belt and front pulley.

 

[wanderingman]

Maybe I'm not understanding you correctly. But as far as I can see. We are still talking apples and oranges and there is no correlation.

You cannot align the rear wheel of the Spyder to the frame unless you also change the relationship between the front pulley (read Engine) and the frame. If you try to align rear wheel to the frame there is virtually no chance that the belt will track correctly on the pulleys. There is no way the dealership did that. Frame referenced alignments are a total waste of time on the Spyder. This has been know for a very long time. But it does not mean that it isn't still being used. Especially by dealerships.

When talking alignment on the Spyder, completely forget the frame. The frame does not even enter into the equation. Instead, the rear wheel is adjusted (or aligned) so the belt runs correctly on the pulleys. So, you are aligning the rear pulley to the front pullet. Not the frame.

Once this is done the front wheels are aligned with the rear wheel. The idea being everything that touches the ground (the 3 tires) are in correct alignment. This is the only way to get a proper alignment. And the ROLO laser system is the best way to achieve this.

BajaRon, I do not disagree with you. While I was not aware that the engine was the starting datum, my only point was that both SpyderAnn and MartinRedCoates statements were not in conflict. One referencing wheel position in reference to datum and the other referencing alignment tool position. Due to the numbers MartinRedCoates has given, it does sound as if the tech doing the alignment on MartinRedCoates Spyder was using the frame as datum, not the engine. I also can see the logic of using the engine as the datum. Using the frame could provide correct handling but could sure screw up belt life and cause vibration. As I stated I have done a lot of alignment but not even one Spyder. I am very much in the learning mode. I appreciate your comment as it helps me to learn something I was unaware of.

 

[Gray Ghost]

Using the frame could provide correct handling but could sure screw up belt life and cause vibration.

The original BRP method of alignment aligned the front wheels to the frame. And it always, at least 99.9% of the time results in horrible handling. The rear wheel will never be 100% aligned to the frame. It has to be adjustable to the belt. So the laser alignment aligns the front wheel to the rear wheel, resulting in correct handling.

 

[BajaRon]

BajaRon, I do not disagree with you. While I was not aware that the engine was the starting datum, my only point was that both SpyderAnn and MartinRedCoates statements were not in conflict. One referencing wheel position in reference to datum and the other referencing alignment tool position. Due to the numbers MartinRedCoates has given, it does sound as if the tech doing the alignment on MartinRedCoates Spyder was using the frame as datum, not the engine. I also can see the logic of using the engine as the datum. Using the frame could provide correct handling but could sure screw up belt life and cause vibration. As I stated I have done a lot of alignment but not even one Spyder. I am very much in the learning mode. I appreciate your comment as it helps me to learn something I was unaware of.

I guess you could say that ultimately the engine determines how the front wheels are aligned. Since the front wheels are aligned with the rear wheel. And the rear wheel position is determined by the front sprocket. And the front sprocket position is determined by the engine orientation.

For the frame to be of any use as a reference for alignment. The engine would have to be perfectly aligned with the frame. And I can guarantee you that isn't going to be the case.

In most vehicles, engine orientation has nothing to do with alignment. But you will notice that all wheel drive vehicles must have all 4 wheels aligned. They may use the frame for reference. But in this case the drive wheels do not need to be aligned with any power transfer system as the rear wheel of the Spyder does. And that makes a world of difference.

If you aligned the rear wheel of the Spyder with the frame, the belt would not ride correctly on the pulleys. I think it would do more than just increase vibration. The belt would most likely destroy itself in short order.