Mille swinger

Message

D-Rider · #16 Post by **D-Rider** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:00 pm

FlyingKiwi wrote:This is the sort of info I'd bookmark if we could

Yeah - I'll repost it in a new thread and make it a sticky

D-Rider · #17 Post by **D-Rider** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:05 pm

k1w1boy wrote:... dumb Q, I'll give that the mille swingarm is definitely sexier than stock, but is it 'better' ride wise - apart from (presumeably) being less of a headache to chuck a mille shock into? This is Mr. Mechanically 'challenged' speaking remember, rather than one of you torque-wrench-wielding-can-rebuild-an-engine-blindfolded-while juggling-flaming-hedgehogs-in-my-right-hand type dudes.

Nah - this is just a bling mod. Nobody that has swapped has claimed any improvement other than looks.
BTW the Mille and Falco swingers both weigh the same .... I know this because I weighed them both last night (5.6 kg) .... although the Mille one had the extra weight of the powder coating !!

Aladinsaneuk · #18 Post by **Aladinsaneuk** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:29 pm

i oelieve that the mille swinger increases the overall length by 1 inch

and as mrs drider told me, that extra inch is so important

(sorry andy!)

actually, I am hoping the increase in wheelbase may help me with my quicker steering - am off to explore suffolks twisties tomorrow afternoon to see how it goes....

tommy · #19 Post by **tommy** » Thu Jun 26, 2008 9:47 pm

Hopefully i'll soon find out what difference. I've also got Ohlins mille shock and linkages that i shall be using. Im no knee down wheelie merchant, and even I can notice that the rear shock is turd

D-Rider · #20 Post by **D-Rider** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 12:43 am

Aladinsaneuk wrote:i oelieve that the mille swinger increases the overall length by 1 inch

and as mrs drider told me, that extra inch is so important

(sorry andy!)

actually, I am hoping the increase in wheelbase may help me with my quicker steering - am off to explore suffolks twisties tomorrow afternoon to see how it goes....

I believe the swinger is a bit longer but the actual wheelbase will depend on the actual position of the wheel spindle within its adjustment.
If you use the same chain & sprockets that you've used with the Falco arm, the wheelbase won't change (different people claim it is or is not possible to use the same chain). Of course if you fit a longer chain, the wheelbase will increase.
Basically, what I'm saying is that the wheelbase is not determined by the length of the swinging arm but the position of the wheel spindle which is determined by the length of the chain.

Firestarter · #21 Post by **Firestarter** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 7:16 am

D-Rider wrote:Basically, what I'm saying is that the wheelbase is not determined by the length of the swinging arm but the position of the wheel spindle which is determined by the length of the chain.

Surely the shock & linkage have more of an effect - the spring on the shock vs. rider weight will set the sag, will determine the wheel spindle's position relative to the pivot point? The chain will have some effect (too tight means it's applying a force, which would cause the swinger to rotate "down"), but the shock would have more?

D-Rider · #22 Post by **D-Rider** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 9:44 am

OK - yes I know I was ignoring any effect of changing wheelbase due to the angle of the swinger - I'm assuming that the difference is small - which it's fairly likely to be.

sabestian · #23 Post by **sabestian** » Fri Jun 27, 2008 5:31 pm

Aladinsaneuk wrote:i oelieve that the mille swinger increases the overall length by 1 inch

It's 10mm actually - measured myself. Negligible. Chain adjustment range is like 3 times more.