Latest topics
» Speedo drive - Rear wheel
Yesterday at 7:31 pm by peter@dunfordconstruction

» Battery Help
Yesterday at 2:07 pm by FBKev

» Yorkshire police Falcon
Tue Jan 22, 2019 1:02 pm by piston 197

» Cruiser oil
Mon Jan 21, 2019 6:48 pm by kerabo

» One from every year
Mon Jan 21, 2019 8:12 am by piston 197

» American thoughts of a British Bike Cruiser 39.
Sun Jan 20, 2019 5:10 pm by John Wakefield

» NEW CLUB MEMBERS
Sun Jan 20, 2019 10:40 am by piston 197

» Cruiser 39 gear change
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:16 pm by kerabo

» Re-register Cruiser/Falcon
Sat Jan 19, 2019 1:08 pm by peter@dunfordconstruction


what way up

Go down

what way up

Post  alan67 on Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:42 pm

hi guys what way up do the springs go in the falcon 67 forks ? opps alan
alan67
alan67

Posts : 94
Join date : 2017-10-30
Age : 62
Location : lowestoft suffolk

Back to top Go down

67 forks

Post  keith livingstone on Wed Nov 22, 2017 10:34 pm

Hi Alan
Good to hear you're progressing with your 67.  I'm a bit puzzled by your question about the forks and springs.
The ones for the 67 are constant rate wound and from recollection it doesn't matter which way round they go.
As you've already pointed out your forks are certainly different to those of the 67.  Looking at your bike the fork construction is different in the way they attach to the lower yoke.  Maybe they have been upgraded with some off road springs.  Multi rate springs
usually go with the tighter wound coils to the top, though I could be wrong?
I've attached a picture from the manual of the 67 forks as a ref.

Best wishes
Keith
keith livingstone
keith livingstone

Posts : 66
Join date : 2012-11-25
Age : 61
Location : Northern Ireland

Back to top Go down

what way up

Post  alan67 on Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:25 pm

Hi Keith   the more i look at these folks the more they confuse me,  if you look at your drawing the top and bottom  oil nipple is on the side ,  mine come out from the front at the top and side at the bottom?  the springs have a big difference form top to bottom very close coils at one end compared to the other, and the headlight arms are to short , apart from that my forks look as drawing [ i still think the are from a merlin   as for wheel spindles front spindle measure .484" =1/2" and rear spindle measure .554 =9/16"  and thickness of whats left of old lock nut is .156 = 5/32"  both fork tubes slide nicely in fork bush top and bottom  so im going to rebuild what i'v got  your question  earlier ?  i think mine is 1954  it has journal bearings front and rear and frame number is um  not umm  and has the slight bend in top of frame to change fork angle from 28 degrees to 26.5  i have no papers with bike but thats just another job for good old JH later  
     Alan
alan67
alan67

Posts : 94
Join date : 2017-10-30
Age : 62
Location : lowestoft suffolk

Back to top Go down

Fork type

Post  piston 197 on Thu Nov 23, 2017 4:59 pm

Earlier forks had sliding leg diameter of 1.096" later type as used on Falcon 58 and 67 had 1.122" diameter tubes, quick measure will tell if you have the correct forks, but everything points to them being off a rigid Falcon or Merlin pre 1952 ? Only other difference is the lock stops where the bottom yoke contacts the frame to prevent forks striking the tank, might be worth swinging your forks side to side to make sure they do not contact fuel tank which would be a MOT failure, (not that you need one), but would do nothing in the way of favours to the tank ?
JH
piston 197
piston 197
Moderator

Posts : 4223
Join date : 2008-08-17
Location : ross-on-wye

Back to top Go down

what way up

Post  alan67 on Thu Nov 23, 2017 6:10 pm

Arrr thanks John i will check it out and good idea about fork stops now the time to sort out before paint [ i already have one good dent in the tank ] Alan
alan67
alan67

Posts : 94
Join date : 2017-10-30
Age : 62
Location : lowestoft suffolk

Back to top Go down

Re: what way up

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum