Is the only difference with height the length of shocks?

[Muddyape]

For example; If you put nightster shocks on a roadster or roadster shocks on a nightster would the geometry be the same (would the nightster become the roadster and vice versa)? Does Harley use one standard head angle or does it vary based on the model? I'm picking up my Nightster tomorrow and I love the bike but if the ride is a little too low (i weigh a 285) i figured I was just going to change the shocks...nothing radical probably just to the 12" 412 HD's. Would this really screw with the steering etc. or is it perfectly fine to do? Thanks guys....this is a great forum.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

There are fork length differences as well.

So putting R length shocks on an N would result in faster steering.

Someone on this board has already gone up to 12.5 in. shocks without changing the forks, I don't know about 13.5 in. like the Roadsters though.

Maybe 13 in. would be the compromise.

Damn, maybe I shouldn't have sold my 13. in. progressives, we coulda at least TRIED them on my wife's 883L... arghhh

[obiwan]

Not sure about the Nightster, but an XL50 is just a Roadster with shorter rear shocks, 11.75" against 13.5". I replaced my stock (XL50) shockers with 412 12" and saw no appreciable handling difference (except a better ride).

The consequence of raising the rear substantially is that the bike will steer quicker into the corners (it affects rake & trail but I forget the theory). You can get to the point where too high will make the bike unstable.

If your theory holds true about the steering head angle and they're all the same, then your Nightster will end up having similar dimensions to an XL50.

[Folkie]

There are fork length differences as well.

So putting R length shocks on an N would result in faster steering.

Someone on this board has already gone up to 12.5 in. shocks without changing the forks, I don't know about 13.5 in. like the Roadsters though.

Maybe 13 in. would be the compromise.

Damn, maybe I shouldn't have sold my 13. in. progressives, we coulda at least TRIED them on my wife's 883L... arghhh
Kev, I don't know about the Nightster, but most of the models have the same length forks don't they? I know the Lows have shorter forks, but they're the only ones I'm aware of.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Not sure about the Nightster, but an XL50 is just a Roadster with shorter rear shocks, 11.75" against 13.5". I replaced my stock (XL50) shockers with 412 12" and saw no appreciable handling difference (except a better ride).

The consequence of raising the rear substantially is that the bike will steer quicker into the corners (it affects rake & trail but I forget the theory). You can get to the point where too high will make the bike unstable.

If your theory holds true about the steering head angle and they're all the same, then your Nightster will end up having similar dimensions to an XL50.

I say it again, there are FORK LENGTH DIFFERENCES!

The 1200N and the 883L share the lowest suspensions (front and rear) these days (the 1200L may have the same fork length too).

I belive this means that when you change the shocks you will change the steering slightly.

(note - customs have slightly different rake/trail numbers, but I think that comes from the wheel and possibly a fork change, not from the frame).

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Kev, I don't know about the Nightster, but most of the models have the same length forks don't they? I know the Lows have shorter forks, but they're the only ones I'm aware of.

The 883L and 1200N share the lowest seat heights. Part of this is through the seat, part of this is through the shock, but I'm almost certain the rest of this is through the forks.

Could be wrong, as I don't have a parts book, but I'd be very surprised.

Accessory catalog doesn't say for SURE though

http://www.harley-davidson.com/gma/gma_product.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=84552444876735 6&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302286655&ASSORTMENT%3C%3East_id=2534374302286655&bmUID=1175178834528&bmLocale=en_US

Sportster® Low Front Suspension Kit

Original Equipment on the '04-'06 XL883L and '06-later XL200L this kit is designed to lower the front suspension by approximately 1" while preserving the ride quality. The shorter fork spring

45480-05

Fits '04-later XL models (except '07 XL883L and XL1200N). Stock on '04-'06 XL883L and '04-later XL1200L models. XL883, XL883R, and XL1200R models must also have Low Rear Shock Kit P/N 54750-05, 54731-04, or 54733


But the 1200N is SO short, I'd be darn surprised.

[Folkie]

(note - customs have slightly different rake/trail numbers, but I think that comes from the wheel and possibly a fork change, not from the frame).
The wheel change makes very little difference. Most of the difference in rake/trail numbers comes from the lower rear suspension.

[obiwan]

I say it again, there are FORK LENGTH DIFFERENCES!

OK ... you tell me. Look pretty similar in my book! :doh

10449

[Folkie]

The 883L and 1200N share the lowest seat heights. Part of this is through the seat, part of this is through the shock, but I'm almost certain the rest of this is through the forks.

Could be wrong, as I don't have a parts book, but I'd be very surprised.

Accessory catalog doesn't say for SURE though

http://www.harley-davidson.com/gma/gma_product.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=84552444876735 6&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302286655&ASSORTMENT%3C%3East_id=2534374302286655&bmUID=1175178834528&bmLocale=en_US



But the 1200N is SO short, I'd be darn surprised.
Sorry Kev, I think we're getting wires crossed here. What I'm saying is, yes, the Lows (and presumably the Nightster) definitely have shorter forks. But, they're the only ones that do. Ie: the Custom's forks are the same as the Standard and Roadster. I have got the parts book, and the Custom and Standard forks are definitely the same. The part #s for the Roadster are different in some cases becuase of dual brakes etc.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

The wheel change makes very little difference. Most of the difference in rake/trail numbers comes from the lower rear suspension.

I know that plays a roll in it, but since there are height differences across the line, wouldn't there need to be more front end differences.

I mean the 883, 883R, 883L, XL50, 1200R, 1200N and 1200L all have the same steering head angles according to Harley.

HOWEVER ground clearnces are different.

883, 883R and 1200R - 5.6 in.
Xl50 and 1200L - 4.4 in.
883L and 1200N - 3.9 in.

We already know for certain that the 1200L and the 883L have a shorter front suspension.

So how do the XL50 and 1200N maintain those same ground clearences without also changing steering head angle or front suspensions/tires too?

Maybe the specs are just wrong.

But again the 1200N is SLAMMED. Like walk over the rear fender and just sit down kinda slammed.

[Folkie]

OK ... you tell me. Look pretty similar in my book!
The '04 - '06 Lows and the '07 1200L have 1" shorter forks, achieved with different springs and damper rods. You can even buy the kit to do this, it's in the P&A catalogue. No one does though, they get Progressive lowering springs instead.

The '07 883L and the 1200N are lower still, so presumably have even shorter forks, or shorter shocks, or both?

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Sorry Kev, I think we're getting wires crossed here. What I'm saying is, yes, the Lows (and presumably the Nightster) definitely have shorter forks. But, they're the only ones that do. Ie: the Custom's forks are the same as the Standard and Roadster. I have got the parts book, and the Custom and Standard forks are definitely the same. The part #s for the Roadster are different in some cases becuase of dual brakes etc.

I wasn't sure on the custom forks, but thanks for that data.

How about the XL50 and the 1200N then????

[Hot Rod Sporty]

I could definitely be wrong, but I was under the impression that the Neck Rake on the frame was slightly different on customs compared to say roadsters. Anyone have any definite information on this?:geek :geek :geek

Perhaps the difference is in the trees?

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

OK ... you tell me. Look pretty similar in my book! :doh

10449

Similar isn't "the same"


You have a 1200N, XL50 and 1200R in that screen capture - here's the data respectively


DIMENSIONS
Length 85.8 in. 89.1 in. 90.1 in.

Seat Height (now this is a combo of suspensions and seats)

Laden 25.3 in. 27.3 in. 28.1 in.
Unladen 26.3 in. 29.3 in. 29.9 in.

Ground Clearance 3.9 in. 4.4 in. 5.6 in.

Rake Steering Head/Trail 29.6º / 4.6 in. 29.6º / 4.6 in. 29.6º / 4.6 in.

Wheelbase 60 in. 59.7 in. 60.0 in.

Some interesting differences.

K

[Folkie]

I know that plays a roll in it, but since there are height differences across the line, wouldn't there need to be more front end differences.

I mean the 883, 883R, 883L, XL50, 1200R, 1200N and 1200L all have the same steering head angles according to Harley.

HOWEVER ground clearnces are different.

883, 883R and 1200R - 5.6 in.
Xl50 and 1200L - 4.4 in.
883L and 1200N - 3.9 in.

We already know for certain that the 1200L and the 883L have a shorter front suspension.

So how do the XL50 and 1200N maintain those same ground clearences without also changing steering head angle or front suspensions/tires too?

Maybe the specs are just wrong.

But again the 1200N is SLAMMED. Like walk over the rear fender and just sit down kinda slammed.
Think of it like this: take a bike, lower the rear by 1", lower the front by 1". Result: bike 1" lower, rake and trail are the same.

Then just lower the rear and not the front: bike not quite as low, but with slower steering.

And yes, some of the specs are wrong: according to H-D, a bike can be lower and have less ground clearance, without reducing lean angle!

[Folkie]

I could definitely be wrong, but I was under the impression that the Neck Rake on the frame was slightly different on customs compared to say roadsters. Anyone have any definite information on this?:geek :geek :geek

Perhaps the difference is in the trees?
I'll check the part#s when I get home, but I'm sure the frames are the same and the trees are the same. The changes in steering geometry come from suspension and wheel changes alone. On the Customs, nearly all of it is in changing from a 13.25" shock to an 11.75".

[obiwan]

HOWEVER ground clearnces are different.

883, 883R and 1200R - 5.6 in.
Xl50 and 1200L - 4.4 in.
883L and 1200N - 3.9 in.

.............

So how do the XL50 and 1200N maintain those same ground clearences without also changing steering head angle or front suspensions/tires too?

Maybe the specs are just wrong.

Kev, you're right (as always :) )

Take a closer look at the bike lengths - the XL 50 is 1" shorter than the Roadster and the Nightster 3.3" shorter than the XL50. But Harley says the Rake & Trail are all the same.

Ground clearance difference is explained by rear shocks but wheelbase must be from shorter front springs. I would have thought that would also change the Rake & Trail specs but apparently not.

I still maintain if the OP puts 12" shocks on his Nightster he will end up with similar to an XL50 ... albeit a slammed one.

[skratch]

the frames and trees are all the same. the difference is in the shocks and the fork tubes. the L has shorter shocks and shorter forks. the C has the same shocks, standard forks. so it is just a matter of how the different parts are assembled. the 21 inch wheel is low profile so the difference between it and the 19 is only about 3/8 inch (radius).

[Folkie]

the XL 50 is 1" shorter than the Roadster and the Nightster 3.3" shorter than the XL50. But Harley says the Rake & Trail are all the same.
Most of the difference in the length of the Nightster is the chopped fender and there not being a tail light sticking out the back.

[sportysrock]

I assumed it was in the fork springs. Think about it, the same tubes mean they stock less parts.

Now, where is the guy from the factory, prob working? Rolnlow I think is his name.

[obiwan]

Most of the difference in the length of the Nightster is the chopped fender and there not being a tail light sticking out the back.
:doh I'm a dumbass !! Should have read the wheelbase figures instead of length ...

In which case they're almost identical.

Think I'll slink off to bed now, with my tail between my legs, before I make a complete goose of myself further ... :o

[Hot Rod Sporty]

I'll check the part#s when I get home, but I'm sure the frames are the same and the trees are the same. The changes in steering geometry come from suspension and wheel changes alone. On the Customs, nearly all of it is in changing from a 13.25" shock to an 11.75".



Just seems strange that a 1.5" drop in the rear end would result in a 2" difference in rake.....

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Think of it like this: take a bike, lower the rear by 1", lower the front by 1". Result: bike 1" lower, rake and trail are the same.

Then just lower the rear and not the front: bike not quite as low, but with slower steering.


No I realize they do that (lower the rear and not the front), HOWEVER, if that's the case, then either the steering head specs are wrong no?

Which you seem to potentially agree with:



And yes, some of the specs are wrong: according to H-D, a bike can be lower and have less ground clearance, without reducing lean angle!

But the REAL key is that the GROUND CLEARANCE specs. IF THEY ARE RIGHT, then the 883L and 1200N must have the same rear AND FRONT suspension lengths right?

Of course, that doesn't explain how the 1200L supposedly does too, but has a HIGHER ground clearance.

NUTS

K

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Kev, you're right (as always :) )

Take a closer look at the bike lengths - the XL 50 is 1" shorter than the Roadster and the Nightster 3.3" shorter than the XL50. But Harley says the Rake & Trail are all the same.

Ground clearance difference is explained by rear shocks but wheelbase must be from shorter front springs. I would have thought that would also change the Rake & Trail specs but apparently not.

I still maintain if the OP puts 12" shocks on his Nightster he will end up with similar to an XL50 ... albeit a slammed one.

:doh I'm a dumbass !! Should have read the wheelbase figures instead of length ...

In which case they're almost identical.

Think I'll slink off to bed now, with my tail between my legs, before I make a complete goose of myself further ... :o


Nahhh, we're all just guessing here.

Folkie has the best data so far, cause he's using the part's book.

You and I are trying to draw conclusions from suspect specs.

It's all good.

I would like to know for sure though, cause I'd love to consider a 1200N with taller shocks... maybe 13"!

I figure it's not like the Sportys are all that twitchy in the first place anyway, even with that change I doubt anything would happen except the turn-in might feel a little quicker.

I might experiment with the wife's 883L, she's STARTING to ease her position on the shock length (I guess with 2 years of riding the thing comes a level of comfort).

Kev

[Folkie]

Just seems strange that a 1.5" drop in the rear end would result in a 2" difference in rake.....
It's not a 1.5" drop, it's 1.5" shorter shocks, so its what?, a 2" drop. Plus the front is 3/8" higher due to the wheel change. So what's the difference in rake? 2 degrees? I don't seem to be able to get into the H-D site at the moment to get the figures. When I can I'll do the maths.

[sprtrjl]

Just seems strange that a 1.5" drop in the rear end would result in a 2" difference in rake.....

I think you may be confusing 2 inches with 2 degrees, big difference.

Raising or lowering the rear or front alone will slightly alter the Rake (caster) of the forks.

Looking at the web site, looks as though there is only about .5 degree in rake difference and that is on the 1200C

Interesting that the laden and unladen seat height change is so different.
The 1200n only drops 1" while the others are more like 1 3/4 to 2.0"

[Folkie]

Interesting that the laden and unladen seat height change is so different.
The 1200n only drops 1" while the others are more like 1 3/4 to 2.0"
The shocks are so short, there's not much available travel to drop. And having so little travel, they have to be stiff so's not to bottom out, therefore they hardly move at all.

[Hot Rod Sporty]

I think you may be confusing 2 inches with 2 degrees, big difference.

Raising or lowering the rear or front alone will slightly alter the Rake (caster) of the forks.

Looking at the web site, looks as though there is only about .5 degree in rake difference and that is on the 1200C

Interesting that the laden and unladen seat height change is so different.
The 1200n only drops 1" while the others are more like 1 3/4 to 2.0"



You're right, I meant degrees. It seems like I remember the rake figures for my '05 being 31.something. That's where I got the 2 degrees. I cant find specs on the website anymore, though, and the rake/trail measurements aren't in the service manual.

[Screw Loose Dan]

Well, I'll jump into this thread. I don't have my parts book here at work, so I'll keep the guessing to a minimum. I do know that the 1200N and 883L have the same front suspension parts which are different then most of the other models. I'm not sure about the 1200L (I was thinking it was different, but again I shouldn't guess). I also was thinking the 1200N and 883L have the same shocks.

Now all that being said, I have replaced my 883L rear shocks with standard 883 rear shocks. I didn't measure the difference in length, but I did take a picture:

http://xlforum.net/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_1165.JPG

I made no changes to the front forks. I have over 800 miles with the new shocks on (I took a trip to Ohio over the weekend). The lean angle is incredibly increased. I'm not an expert when it comes to cycle handling. But I would say the steering is different with the longer rear shocks. Not bad, just different. I believe they call it quicker and I would agree that's probably an appropriate way of describing it.

So there ya have it. The best as I know it.

[Folkie]

OK, now I'm home I can get on the H-D site again. The wheelbase is 60", the drop is, what did we say, 2" lower at the back plus 3/8" higher at the front. So that should change the angle of the bike by about 2.3°. That's all very well, but the specs (I'm comparing here an '06 883 with an '06 883C) say the rake chages by only 0.5°: 29.6° to 30.1°. Somethin' ain't right!

I've checked the part #s. The frames are definitely the same for all models, and so are the upper triple trees. The lower ones have a different part # for the Customs compared to all the others, but that's probably just because of the different headlight mounting. Different part, but same dimensions?

[Folkie]

Well, I'll jump into this thread. I don't have my parts book here at work, so I'll keep the guessing to a minimum. I do know that the 1200N and 883L have the same front suspension parts which are different then most of the other models. I'm not sure about the 1200L (I was thinking it was different, but again I shouldn't guess). I also was thinking the 1200N and 883L have the same shocks.

Now all that being said, I have replaced my 883L rear shocks with standard 883 rear shocks. I didn't measure the difference in length, but I did take a picture:

http://xlforum.net/photopost/data/500/medium/IMG_1165.JPG

I made no changes to the front forks. I have over 800 miles with the new shocks on (I took a trip to Ohio over the weekend). The lean angle is incredibly increased. I'm not an expert when it comes to cycle handling. But I would say the steering is different with the longer rear shocks. Not bad, just different. I believe they call it quicker and I would agree that's probably an appropriate way of describing it.

So there ya have it. The best as I know it.
When you talk about 883Ls you have to be specific about year.

The 1200L (all years) and the '05 - '06 883L all have the same shocks as the Customs (11.75") and they all have the forks lowered about 1" lower than all the other bikes. THe fork legs are the same, the lowers are the same, the lowering is done with different springs and damper rods.

The '07 883L amd the 1200N are lower. We can see in your picture above that the shocks are shorter. What are they, 11" shocks?, 10.5" shocks? The question is, is the front lower (than the other Lows) too? Don't know.

I think it's a fairly safe bet though that this lower Low won't have a higher front than the other Lows. So, since the '07 883L and the 1200N are clearly the same, suspension wise (the specs are identical), I think we can conclude that the 1200N hasn't got the same forks as the Roadster. It's got lower forks. Maybe the same as the Lows, maybe a bit lower.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

When you talk about 883Ls you have to be specific about year.


DRCS is talking about his 07.

But I'd be surprised if they revised the forks for the 07. I bet they have only the one lowering kit for all 04 or later models (that don't already have the one lowered front suspension).



The 1200L (all years) and the '05 - '06 883L all have the same shocks as the Customs (11.75") and they all have the forks lowered about 1" lower than all the other bikes. THe fork legs are the same, the lowers are the same, the lowering is done with different springs and damper rods.

The '07 883L amd the 1200N are lower. We can see in your picture above that the shocks are shorter. What are they, 11" shocks?, 10.5" shocks? The question is, is the front lower (than the other Lows) too? Don't know.


His photo shows the short 07 883L shocks next to STANDARD HEIGHT 883 shocks (I'm wondering now if those are the same as 1200R shocks).



I think it's a fairly safe bet though that this lower Low won't have a higher front than the other Lows. So, since the '07 883L and the 1200N are clearly the same, suspension wise (the specs are identical), I think we can conclude that the 1200N hasn't got the same forks as the Roadster. It's got lower forks. Maybe the same as the Lows, maybe a bit lower.

I think that brings us back to my position when we started this ;)

[Folkie]

His photo shows the short 07 883L shocks next to STANDARD HEIGHT 883 shocks
Oops! :doh

In that case, they look like ordinary Low / Custom shocks, 11.75".

But they've got to have done something to get the '07 883L and the 1200N lower than the other Lows.

If the specs are right (doubtful!) the ground clearance on the '07 883 and the 1200N is 1/2" less; they've got to have changed something, shorter shocks or lower forks.

[Screw Loose Dan]

Sorry for the confusion about the year of my bike. I presumed it was evident in my info (signature, etc) and due to the fact we are in the EFI/07 section of the forum.

The 2007 parts catalog lists the 1200N and the 883L rear shocks as different part numbers. I just measured mine and from bolt center to bolt center (not sure if that's how they are normally measured) they are 11". The 1200R and std 883 have the same part number listed (obviously different then the 883L/1200N). The 883C, 1200C, XL50, and 1200L all have the same part number listed. The 883R has their own part number. That makes 5 different shock part numbers.

And as far as the front forks, the 1200N and 883L have the same part numbers except for the parts on the 1200N that are blacked out (which I think are all external parts). Looking at the internals of the forks the 883L and 1200N's are significantly different then all the others. Without listing all the parts that's the best way to describe it (they even break out the diagram seperately because there are different parts). What I can tell you about the other models (excluding the 883L/1200N) is the only differences I can see is that the 1200L has a different spring then the rest of the models. But the 1200L is significantly different then the 883L/1200N. I hope I made that clear enough. To recap, all models except the 883L/1200L/1200N have the same fork internals that I can tell. The 1200L is entirely different then the 883L and 1200N (which appear to be the same). I should note the fork sliders are different amongst the different models (but I think that's a difference between dual brakes/chrome/black/brushed options).

They list one frame and one frame ONLY for ALL models.

Now for the speculation...I suspect that the 883L and 1200N have shorter forks then the 1200L (hence different part #). This would make them lower. I also suspect that the 2007 883L has different forks then prior years. The chrome bible (HD Accessory catalog) lists several items that fit all 04-Later XL's EXCEPT 07 883L & 1200N's. For example see part #45480-05 (http://www.harley-davidson.com/gma/gma_product.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=84552444876735 6&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302286655&ASSORTMENT%3C%3East_id=2534374302286655&bmUID=1175231507219&bmLocale=en_US).

Does all that help or just add to the confusion!?!?! ;)

[Folkie]

It helps immensely; there's nothing like a few facts for moving the debate on. :)

BTW, I knew what year bike you'd got, I was just trying to say that earlier 883Ls are different. I had forgotten what forum we're in. :doh

[doxbike]

Nuthin' like a few damn facts to blow the hell out of a good debate.s:censort

[xavi]

I'd say that all XL stock forks are the same lenght. Differences are due to the coil spring.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

I'd say that all XL stock forks are the same lenght. Differences are due to the coil spring.

That may have once been true, but I THINK that DRCS is saying that is no longer the case.

And I'm pretty sure I've seen photos in the accessories catalog that showed the fork tubes (I've always called them sliders, as they travel in the lowers, but I'm thinking DRCS calls the lowers sliders cause they slide ON the fork tube) were different lengths.

This is significant to me because I'm trying to convince the wife to raise her 883L a bit for better handling and suspension.

K

[Screw Loose Dan]

I think I was referring to Lower Fork Slider as the part that the brake attaches to. Click here (http://www.harley-davidson.com/gma/gma_product.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3Eprd_id=84552444184190 3&FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=2534374302290171&ASSORTMENT%3C%3East_id=2534374302290171&bmUID=1175270588422&bmLocale=en_US) for an example of what Harley and I refer to as a "Lower Fork Slider".

Harley refers to the upper tube as a "Slider Tube" in the parts catalog (that's the part that clamps in the triple tree). The slider tube is the same on 883L and 1200L's (I don't have my parts catalog at work that includes 1200N's, but I believe it to be the same as the 883L/1200L). All other models use the same slider tube.

The internal parts are different as I described in my original post. By internal parts I'm referring to the springs and dampers.

This would be really easy to explain if I could post the two pages from the parts catalog...but I guess that would get me into a whole lotta trouble. :censor

Anyway, sorry to throw facts at a good debate. Keep up the good work speculating! ;) Clear as mud now.

[04ctd]

i thought this:
(just to keep the debate going...)


the first few years of LOW's had REAR shocks only.

the 07 was the FIRST year of LOWs to get REAR shocks and FRONT springs.

the 07 Low and the 07 Nightster probably have the same mechanical parts, just different colors, hence different part numbers.

but, here's the rub: a fat boy can't ride a 07 Low without bottoming out the shocks. i rode the wife's to work yesterday to get it up to temp & run out the RPM's some.

i bottom on 25% of the bumps in our bad roads.

so, how can a big boy buy the N and ride it comfortably?

it needs more spring rate to and shorter internals to keep it from bottoming out.

there WAS a thread somewhere about "just get custom shocks, and put on the LOW springs" and it won't bottom out...
can't find that today, how found this thread..


<back to your regularly scheduled bickering...>

<ducks under table>

[Screw Loose Dan]

the first few years of LOW's had REAR shocks only.

the 07 was the FIRST year of LOWs to get REAR shocks and FRONT springs.

the 07 Low and the 07 Nightster probably have the same mechanical parts, just different colors, hence different part numbers.


You probably want to be specific when you say "07 Low" as there are definately differences between 2007 883L's and 2007 1200L's suspensions. We can now debate what you meant...thanks for the fodder.

I think this post (http://www.xlforum.net/vbportal/forums/showthread.php?t=47542) is the one you want to look at for what to do with you shock springs.

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

Harley refers to the upper tube as a "Slider Tube" in the parts catalog (that's the part that clamps in the triple tree). The slider tube is the same on 883L and 1200L's (I don't have my parts catalog at work that includes 1200N's, but I believe it to be the same as the 883L/1200L). All other models use the same slider tube.

Clear as mud now.

crap - YES, clear as mud.

When you say "all other models use the same slider tube" do you mean as EACH OTHER or the same as the 883L/1200L/1200N.

I THINK you meant to say the former (same as each other, but different than the 883L/1200L/1200N), but grammatically your statement was ambiguous and could have meant either.

The difference in the 883L/1200L/1200N fork slider tubes are that they are SHORTER? Yes?

i thought this:
(just to keep the debate going...)


the first few years of LOW's had REAR shocks only.

the 07 was the FIRST year of LOWs to get REAR shocks and FRONT springs.

the 07 Low and the 07 Nightster probably have the same mechanical parts, just different colors, hence different part numbers.


<ducks under table>

You better duck.

As my earliest posts in this thread seem to demonstrate (with quotes and references to the accessory catalog) 07 WAS NOT THE FIRST YEAR that Lows received different FRONT SPRINGS.

Jenn's 05 has them as well.

I suspect (I'd have to check) that the Huggers from earlier years had them too (though they MAY have had the stock fork slider tubes, they most certainly had shorter springs).

Kev

[skratch]

I suspect (I'd have to check) that the Huggers from earlier years had them too (though they MAY have had the stock fork slider tubes, they most certainly had shorter springs).

Kev

no, they may have the shorter springs, but the fork tubes are different as well.

[Folkie]

the first few years of LOW's had REAR shocks only.

the 07 was the FIRST year of LOWs to get REAR shocks and FRONT springs.
Other way about: all the other Lows had the same shocks as the Customs: 11.75", they had lower forks only.

but, here's the rub: a fat boy can't ride a 07 Low without bottoming out the shocks. i rode the wife's to work yesterday to get it up to temp & run out the RPM's some.
The H-D 11" shocks are probably no better than the H-D 11.75" shocks. Replace them with 11" Progressive 412s, or preferably (IMO) 440s. How fat is fat? Im about 220 - 225 or something and have no problem. Heavier than that? Try the heavy duty Progressives.

[MikeOK]

Hello.

I own a 1200N and have been looking in to raising it just a bit to make it a little more friendly ride. I have a pair of 12" 418's on the way, however, in the 2007 Progressive catalog they do not yet list the N. In some email correspondence between me and a couple of the Progressive people they are thinking it might be the same as the XL1200C but have not been able to confirm the specs yet. They are working up a new application for the N I am told. Also, I have measured my unloaded stock rear shock and it measures 11 1/8", this has been confirmed by another member here as well.

I bet the N's fork tubes are shorter.

[Screw Loose Dan]

Kev - I'm full of facts. They might be the wrong facts, but I'm full of them. Articulate I'm not. But this is why I play with network packets and such instead of writing technical documentation.

Anyway, I meant that:

45395-04 - Slider tube - CN/CP/CS/CT/CV/CY
46218-05 - Slider tube - CR/CX/CZ

CN = XL883
CP = XL883C
CR = XL883L
CS = XL883R
CV = XL1200R
CT = XL1200C
CX = XL1200L
CZ = XL1200N
CY = XL50

Mud getting lighter colored?

[Screw Loose Dan]

Also, I have measured my unloaded stock rear shock and it measures 11 1/8", this has been confirmed by another member here as well.


Well, I measured my 883L shocks in a hurry before. After reading your post, I was a little more diligent. I reported before that they were 11". I think I was wrong, they might be 11 1/8". I am correct in measuring them center to center, right? They're off the bike, so this is definitely unladen weight.

[Folkie]

Yes, centre to centre is right. Mind you, 1/8" isn't much. Has anyone actually measured, say, a Progressive shock? I bet they're often 1/8" out from the nominal size.

[Folkie]

Thanks to drcstang I've got the part # for the 883L shocks; it's: 54626-07.

I looked them up at the Guernsey H-D site, and the description says:
Shocks, RR, 1/2 Inch Lower
I wonder what 'RR' means? The 883R shocks have that in the description (Shock Abs, RR), but I don't see it anywhere else.

I tried looking that part # up at Zanotti too, I thought it would be the same (usually it is), but it just said: 'Shock Absorber Assy Rear'.

Maybe 'RR' is short for 'rear'?

[Screw Loose Dan]

I would guess your on the right track that RR is "rear". I wonder what the 1/2" lower refers to?

[Folkie]

Well, it could be either:

1. The shocks are 1/2" shorter.

2. The back of the bike is lowered 1/2".

3. The seat is lowered 1/2".

But 2 doesn't really add up. We think the shocks are 11 1/8". So that's 5/8" shorter. So the back of the bike would be dropped about 7/8", something like that.

So, 1 or 3, take your pick. I tend to work on a rough rule of thumb that the seat is lowered by about the same amount as the shock is shortened by. Ie; the lever angle of the shock lowers the back of the bike by more than the decrease in shock length (1/3 more? 1/2 more?), and the seat is forward of the rear axle, but not half way (1/4 to 1/3 maybe?). I must admit I can't be bothered to measure acurately and calculate it mathematicaly (it gets very complicated), but I think that's roughly right.

Of course we think that dimension is 5/8". Go figure! Maybe the 1/2" is only a nominal figure anyway?

[Moved On / My Own Choice]

I suspect (I'd have to check) that the Huggers from earlier years had them too (though they MAY have had the stock fork slider tubes, they most certainly had shorter springs).

Kev

no, they may have the shorter springs, but the fork tubes are different as well.

No, you can't say no, I said it was either or (i.e. I said both)... unless you're saying NO to the "they MAY have had the stock..." then THANKS for the info! ;)


Kev - I'm full of facts. They might be the wrong facts, but I'm full of them. Articulate I'm not. But this is why I play with network packets and such instead of writing technical documentation.

Anyway, I meant that:

45395-04 - Slider tube - CN/CP/CS/CT/CV/CY
46218-05 - Slider tube - CR/CX/CZ

CN = XL883
CP = XL883C
CR = XL883L
CS = XL883R
CV = XL1200R
CT = XL1200C
CX = XL1200L
CZ = XL1200N
CY = XL50

Mud getting lighter colored?

That's what I thought you meant, just being anal-retentively sure. ;)

Gracias



So, 1 or 3, take your pick. I tend to work on a rough rule of thumb that the seat is lowered by about the same amount as the shock is shortened by.

I might be reading too much into this, but you're not looking at seat height specs in all this right? Because there are differences in seats that also can account for that. The Low seats are designed with less padding to sit the rider lower and closer to the controls/bars. Of course, these differences only show in the seat height specs and not the ground clearances obviously.

K

[ReddTigger]

Maybe 'RR' is short for 'rear'?

I've been around automotive parts for almost my entire life.. Anytime you see RR it's either 1 of two things..

#1 RR= Remove and replace... (don't think this works in this case)
#2 RR= Rear, or Right Rear.. (Depending on what parts list you're looking at...

If you see RR and LR then you know it's Right Rear and Left Rear......:D

MOST catalogs list RR as rear, however,, This is the "NORM"

[Folkie]

I might be reading too much into this, but you're not looking at seat height specs in all this right? Because there are differences in seats that also can account for that. The Low seats are designed with less padding to sit the rider lower and closer to the controls/bars. Of course, these differences only show in the seat height specs and not the ground clearances obviously.

K
No, I'm not looking at seat height specs. I was just speculating on the meaning of '1/2 Inch Lower' in the description of the '07 883L shocks. I should think that if the designation of a shock has anything to do with seat height, it would be in relation to one seat. Ie: 'this shock lowers the seat height by 1/2" with the same seat.

It probably just means that the shock is supposed to be about 1/2" shorter than the regular Low and Custom shocks.

[Mean Gene]

Well, I've been doing a lot of measuring. This is the definitive answer, well mine anyway:
The Nightster and 883L are identical in height, except the Nightster has a slightly longer fork about the same length as the 1200L. Both N and 883L use the same rear shocks (11"). The 1200L has 12" shocks and sits 1" higher than the N and 883L. Could the N be a combination...1200L front/883L rear? I have been told that both the 883L and N have lower forks and using progressive springs.

[Folkie]

The 1200L has 12" shocks and sits 1" higher than the N and 883L.
Could that be 11.75"? The '07 1200L has the 11.75" # 54568-04 shock which is the same shock fitted to Customs from '04 on and to all Lows (apart from the '07 883L).

The Nightster and 883L are identical in height, except the Nightster has a slightly longer fork about the same length as the 1200L.
Now that doesn't make sense to me. The Nightster and '07 883L have all the same parts in the forks, apart from the lowers, which are black, so would be a different part #. They are pretty much all completely different to the parts on the 1200L forks.

In the one part where the '07 883L and the Nighster differ, the lowers, the 883L ones are the same as the lowers fitted to all other single disk bikes (Standards, Customs, Lows), certainly since '04, but they're -00 part #s, so maybe since '00.

[Mean Gene]

Could that be 11.75"? The '07 1200L has the 11.75" # 54568-04 shock which is the same shock fitted to Customs from '04 on and to all Lows (apart from the '07 883L).

I'm only going by what I measure on the bike. The 1200L measures 12". It could be that they had the shock turned to it's "hardest" position, but I thought that was just for pre-load and wouldn't effect the height. In any case it's still higher on the 1200L and that's the point.

Now that doesn't make sense to me. The Nightster and '07 883L have all the same parts in the forks, apart from the lowers, which are black, so would be a different part #. They are pretty much all completely different to the parts on the 1200L forks.

In the one part where the '07 883L and the Nighster differ, the lowers, the 883L ones are the same as the lowers fitted to all other single disk bikes (Standards, Customs, Lows), certainly since '04, but they're -00 part #s, so maybe since '00.

I don't understand it either, but measure them (on the bike). The Forks (between the top of the lowers and the bottom of the triple tree) on the 1200L and N are about the same, but it's shorter on the 833L. Believe me, I've spent a lot of time in the showroom with a tape measurer trying to figure this one out.

[Folkie]

It could be that they had the shock turned to it's "hardest" positionWell, it is the same shock (as on the Customs and Lows other than the '07 883L), so that must be it.

[Darkcityscape]

Can't remember the measurements but I have Ohlins rear shocks, 1" taller than stock on my 07/ 1200C. While the ride has improved a lot, no more bottoming out in pot holes and no wallowing round the bends, I have now vibrations when slowing down to 40-35 miles. Could be because of the Metzelers or because, as the stealer said "I changed the geometry of the bike". I suspect if I changed the front wheel to 19" I might find I get much better handling all round as I am told there are more tyres available for that size. I can't quite decide to get rid of the 21" though, I like the look of them... Would it look very different? Would I then chase the modifications round the handlebars to balance the whole thing out?

[Folkie]

Can't remember the measurements but I have Ohlins rear shocks, 1" taller than stock on my 07/ 1200C. While the ride has improved a lot, no more bottoming out in pot holes and no wallowing round the bends, I have now vibrations when slowing down to 40-35 miles. Could be because of the Metzelers or because, as the stealer said "I changed the geometry of the bike". I suspect if I changed the front wheel to 19" I might find I get much better handling all round as I am told there are more tyres available for that size. I can't quite decide to get rid of the 21" though, I like the look of them... Would it look very different? Would I then chase the modifications round the handlebars to balance the whole thing out?
There may be more 19" tyres available, and, yes, it'll look a little different, but it won't change the height much. Certainly not the 1" difference in the rim radius. The difference between the radius of the tyres is only about 3/8", due to the diffedrent sidewall height.

If your vibration is due to 'changing the geometry of the bike' (by raising the rear), then lowering the front will only make it more so.

I wouldn't worry about having 'changed the geometry of the bike'; after all, all you've done is move it part of the way toward the geometry of the Standard and Roadster (since the forks are identical).

[Notabiker]

This is some thread, I actually had to use some brain cells! I plan to change to Progressive's and I also have sent the company an email on fit for my Nightster. I plan to only buy the 11.5 which is just .5 higher than the stock. I like the low look. I was ordering them last week, but I keep on holding back in case these companies including HD come out with Nightster specific items and/or fitted them to the Nightster.

Oh, this was the reply from Progressive:
We are in the process of R@Ding the n modal for o7 we will have a full listing of what is available in the next few months, sorry for the wait.

[vmaxx4]

This is some thread, I actually had to use some brain cells! I plan to change to Progressive's and I also have sent the company an email on fit for my Nightster. I plan to only buy the 11.5 which is just .5 higher than the stock. I like the low look. I was ordering them last week, but I keep on holding back in case these companies including HD come out with Nightster specific items and/or fitted them to the Nightster.

Oh, this was the reply from Progressive:
We are in the process of R@Ding the n modal for o7 we will have a full listing of what is available in the next few months, sorry for the wait.

Thanks for sharing this info. From what I have read here over the past few months I agree with your choice of 11.5" as, IMO, the best upgrade with stock handling characteristics. Keep us informed if you hear any more from progressive.