Making a Husky Turn

[Leftcoast leftkicker]

OK, so here's the deal. I don't want to cut the frame to bring the rake in, don't want to find an '84 frame with the rake in ('cause I have an '82). I read in an MXA 1983 250CR test that Pro Circuit had triples made with 2 degrees less off set and was told by a CH-er that the '86 era bikes had triples with less off set but 2 dealers couldn't confirm it. Short of having clamps made can anyone confirm this?

I also had a brief discussion several months ago with a frame builder and he went on at length about the evils of changing rake & off set- basically that is was a rat hole and you're always chasing unintended consequences.

BTW, my rear shocks are 1/4" longer, I'm running the forks up 7-10mm in the triples and using straight bar mounts. Have also thought about swapping out the tank from "guppy" style to '78-80 style (low & flat).

My buddy has a 490 and I'm depressed every time I get off it.

 

[Picklito]

Good post. No... GREAT post!! Thanks!! Let's sort this out. A good friend of mine once said, "You don't turn a Husky... you enter compass headings." Funny... if it weren't so true.

I can't personally confirm offsets for the various years of 40mm conventional fork. Honestly, I haven't looked into this because I'm not too hopeful that this would help our bikes much... we still have a 30.5 degree rake to deal with. But if someone has REAL FACTS on clamp offset... please post. Maybe it would help. But I do agree with the comment about these changes causing unintentional consequences. Been there, chased that!

I don't have "THE" answer, but I'm doing a few things here and there. All my chassis setup is geared toward a steeper front end, without building a stinkbug or pogo stick. Nothing new here, I think from reading our posts that we're all doing much the same thing:

1. Fork height: Run the forks as high as they'll go (I take the springs out, collapse the front end, and slide the forks up till the wheel just barely clears the fender/frame).

2. Fork springs: Huge problems here. Husky ran a soft spring with lots of preload. The excessive preload makes the front end run high (worsening the long rake), but it still bottoms in big jumps (because the spring rate's too low). Run the front springs with almost zero preload (springs cut/ends re-finished flat) so that the initial few inches of travel follows more modern suspension theory. This really helps the front end settle in turns, and greatly reduces the topping out sensation of the stock setup. Stock Husky springs are LOOOOOOONG, and there's enough inter-coil space for almost 17" of wheel travel before coil bind, so you can cut quite a bit if you really want to try and increase the spring rate. You just make up the difference in length with a PVC spacer. Start with a cut that requires about a 2.5" spacer to get back to 1/8" preload as a good starting point.

3. Rear shocks: Again, I think the rear springs are too soft. I'm only 155-160 in the B-Day suit, and they're barely firm enough. I'm running one more clip of preload out back to keep the ride height up. Admittedly this is the wrong way to do it, but I haven't crossed the stiffer springs bridge yet for the rear shocks.

4. Longer shocks. I've been experimenting with this via the opposite route: Shorter forks. I've been running CR/XC rear suspension with WR forks and that seems to be helpful. So far I'm not missing the travel up front (with the springs fixed as above). My 82 WR forks have 285mm travel.

Hope this helps. Thanks again, LCLK!!

 

[HuskyT]

Just take all the outside lines at Cahuilla and you'll have no problems.... even my '05 TC 450 likes to wallow on the inside lines...... The only way to really get it to turn fast and sharp is to sit all the way up on the tank and get that leading toe pointing out the right direction...

Maybe the flat 80 style tank would help ....

T

 

[bultokid]

Here's the '82 500 I just got and previous owner used a '80 tank for that very reason. Said it matches right up. Would be awesome if someone would do the clamps. George at Uptite says he's looking for his old plans/drawings.

 

[flyarmy]

I read the Motocross Action article on husky hop up parts and Pro Circut claimed their triple clamps for the 83 CR500 pulled the rake in 2 degrees, which would make the frame 28 - 28.5 degrees. Perhaps this is what triple clamp off-set can do with out cutting and modifying frames? Perhaps George can find his drawings and we can talk him into making parts again? Maybe a 43mm Yamaha front end with double leading shoe brakes?
I had a 1981 Maico 490 and it will be tough to get any bike to turn like that bike did no matter what you do to it. That is a beauty of a 500!! Great subject. Mike

 

[auto]

Frames are a dime a dozen.There every where.Get one,cut the back bone,spread it out,reweld it and TRY it out.I didn't say race it.I'm sure you'll get an ideal if might work.If it turns better,try to modify a frame in a professional manor.

 

[plesh490]

Come on guys. Husky's corner just fine if you ride um right. You turn a Maico with the front tire and a Husky with the rear. It has always been like that. I have an original bore, low hour, 81 490 and quite frankly I am tired of hearing about them. They are an awesome machine, don't get me wrong, but i actually prefer the way a Husky handles. They just seem to fit my riding style better. A Maico makes an average or novice rider perform better because the are more accomodating. A Husky race bike is made to be ridden fast by a good rider that can push it. You kinda have to trust them. I never hear people complain about how a 79 RM 400 turns, and they handle much like Husky. It is all based on magazine hype from back in the day. Husky wouldn't of won so many championships overthe years if there bikes had poor frame geometry and handeling. In many ways a Husky is superior, especially for play riding. The rake is what makes them bomb through rough stuff like its not even there. Bring it in, and you won't be blowing past guys in the whoops. Husky knew what they were doin. If you want your bike to turn like Maico, then you should get one. I have a 81 490 and i ride a Husky. My 2 cents

 

[Leftcoast leftkicker]

plesh490 & all: agree you have to ride them differently from the others, i was just looking for that edge. what i neglected to add in my original post is that I'm running 44mm FoxForx (haven't measured front axle offset compared to stock) and cut the seat down (I'm 5'8" w/short inseam & need to touch the ground) about an inch to the overall effect is that i get caught in the "pocket' between the lowered seat and the guppy tank. when i run the safety seat (about an inch taller than stock) i can get right up on the gas cap but lordy is it tall overall!

 

[schimmelaw]

LCLK,

Safety seat? Curious. Post up photo. My seat is in dire need of a make-over and was considering that option if something is available. Currently thinking "Hi-Flite" stock cushion and cover w/ some anti-slip panels, but a safety seat might fit the bill too.

Post up.

Oh yea almost forgot - you owe us photos of the forks.

Rick

 

[Leftcoast leftkicker]

yea,yea, yea will do. btw, my safety seat is an original H-F w/Husky logos

 

[vintage mike]

just back it in ,turn the throttle,and slide it out!

 

[subarumy98]

"You turn a Maico with the front tire and a Husky with the rear."

So I started with a KTM250, 1982, and most comfortable with that. On that baby I can jump to the inside, drift to the outside - anything.
Problem is, I have approached the Husky (500XC 1983) with the same approach.

Turning with the rear, it's so obvious when I think about it...

I reckon I'm close with the following:

• Renthal CR High bars
• Straight up bar clamps (ditched the low angled Husky items for the moment)
• Racetech Gold Valves with drilled rods
• 520ml of 10w Belray oil
• Forks pulled through the triple clamps by 5mm
• Ohlins 6710 rear (10 Compression and 20 Rebound)

Now I need to go test again, and remember this:
"You turn a Maico with the front tire and a Husky with the rear."

 

[GaryM]

Yes you can but if husky found a way to turn with new angled 84 frame , why not take advantage. I have watched Haken Carlqvist years ago really throw his rear out - slide into the corner and bounce off out of the corners - but with much much extra effort. I really don't think we would lose much in the way of husky handling with the modest rake change. Also do most of you have the same issue on riding with all the 4 strokes on our practice tracks ??
The berm angles are just plain different to me. Straight in and hockey stick shape out. Not round like old days. If I could carve around around these different angled berms , or cut across them easier it would be more fun. Hope someone would cut out and machine up some new clamps for us I would purchase a set for sure.






So I started with a KTM250, 1982, and most comfortable with that. On that baby I can jump to the inside, drift to the outside - anything.
Problem is, I have approached the Husky (500XC 1983) with the same approach.

Turning with the rear, it's so obvious when I think about it...

I reckon I'm close with the following:

• Renthal CR High bars
• Straight up bar clamps (ditched the low angled Husky items for the moment)
• Racetech Gold Valves with drilled rods
• 520ml of 10w Belray oil
• Forks pulled through the triple clamps by 5mm
• Ohlins 6710 rear (10 Compression and 20 Rebound)

Now I need to go test again, and remember this:

"You turn a Maico with the front tire and a Husky with the rear."[/quote]

 

[firecrackerkid]

Frames are a dime a dozen.There every where.Get one,cut the back bone,spread it out,reweld it and TRY it out.I didn't say race it.I'm sure you'll get an ideal if might work.If it turns better,try to modify a frame in a professional manor.

LOL brings back a memory of helping my friend cut the backbone or a Honda MR175. After we cut it we tied the back to the truck bumper and the front to the come-along. spread it 1 1/4" and welded a piece of tubing in. It would sure turn but the headshake.........oh man. He never went very fast on that one though. He had retired his 400 cross by then. Wow we did a crapload of mods on that one. Makes me wish I was 16 and in metal shop again.

 

[jimspac]

Reducing the offset in the triple clamps will reduce the trail without steepening the rake. Case in point is a XT500 converted to trials by a gentleman in France. The stock bike had the leading axle forks that he swapped for the older straight leg fork but used them in the leading axle clamps. Because of the offset difference in the triple clamps he got trials turning with 30 deg but offset reduced by 25mm significantly reduced the trail. Frame had no deraking whatsover .Stock other than rear loop mods and assorted brakets

 

[dukkman]

We used to just get on them and ride .
No mods , didn't even change the shocky settings.
I raced a KTM but now own Huskys and find them fine to turn.

 

[adam6402]

We used to just get on them and ride .
No mods , didn't even change the shocky settings.
I raced a KTM but now own Huskys and find them fine to turn.

Amen, ride more wrench less!

 

[Bengt Husky]

Amen, ride more wrench less!

Amen x 2 to that one....

The only thing I'm doing on my standard '82 430 CR is upping the fork springs from the standard 0.32 kg/mm (bed springs) to 0.5 kg/mm. I'm 105 kg and 1.91 (or 231 pounds and 6' 3") and I find the front end way to soft as standard. I run 15wt oil in mine as well and I run the forks through the clamps 5mm and it turns fine.

Two hints though.

1. Don't try and use the berms if there are modern bikes especially 4 strokes on the track. They make such different lines.

2. Don't jump between modern and old bikes. My modern bike rides so much differently to the old Husky. I would suggest just sticking with the husky as much as I can and learn how to ride it.

 

[jimspac]

OK, so here's the deal. I don't want to cut the frame to bring the rake in, don't want to find an '84 frame with the rake in ('cause I have an '82). I read in an MXA 1983 250CR test that Pro Circuit had triples made with 2 degrees less off set and was told by a CH-er that the '86 era bikes had triples with less off set but 2 dealers couldn't confirm it. Short of having clamps made can anyone confirm this?

I also had a brief discussion several months ago with a frame builder and he went on at length about the evils of changing rake & off set- basically that is was a rat hole and you're always chasing unintended consequences.

BTW, my rear shocks are 1/4" longer, I'm running the forks up 7-10mm in the triples and using straight bar mounts. Have also thought about swapping out the tank from "guppy" style to '78-80 style (low & flat).

My buddy has a 490 and I'm depressed every time I get off it.

You should ask Huskydoggg about the 86 triple clamps as he used them on the 83 500 XC/CR he was racing

 

[subarumy98]

@GaryM.
I know exactly what you mean about the different lines !
There again, I have even watched one our ex-Springboks (when an SA sportsman gets to represent his country, similar to MX de Nations for USA) on a CZ 380, his lines are even more weird. Very wide in, and super tight out..

As to the wrenching comments - points taken. These are the last tweaks for me, but I really do like fiddling - better than watching dodgy TV.
At least the wrenching leads to riding

Last question, anyone had success by pulling the forks 10mm or more through the triple clamps ?