Scotts Stabalizer Mounting

pjmac28 · Post by **pjmac28** » 04:25 pm Mar 30 2009

I have already contacted Scotts in regards to this issue and so far they have been great. I am just wondering if anyone that has one do these pictures look incorrect to your setup.

Basically when the stabilizer is mounted to its bracket, bars in and bolted to the bottom bracket the tower pin and arm slot do not line up correctly and vice versa if I place the arm slot into the tower pin the bolt holes on the top bracket do not line up.

Post by **Indawoods** » 04:32 pm Mar 30 2009

Here's mine.... it is reverse mount because I have a computer mounted also...

This is also a KX clamp mount...

pjmac28 · Post by **pjmac28** » 04:39 pm Mar 30 2009

I just figured it out. The bottom bracket was 180 off. The person that had the bike before me must have wanted the bars that 6mm towards them.

Inda, did you just flip the arm around or is that a different arm for the purpose of the computer. I have the bowed Renthals and where I want the bars is almost exactly over the adjusters.

Post by **Indawoods** » 05:08 pm Mar 30 2009

I ordered the stabilizer this way... clamp also was made for the installation with a computer. The kicker is I don't have to use special bars with it....

Colorado Mike · Post by **Colorado Mike** » 05:14 pm Mar 30 2009

They sell the tool that removes the bracket so you can turn it around.

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 03:23 pm Mar 31 2009

Seeing as both of you have one...what is the length of the arm on each? I'm curious if Inda's is simply turned around..or is a different length.

In any case, make sure there is no force applied to the arm other than to control the arc of the bars. They make a big deal about that in the instructions I've seen..'cuz it matters.

..which was the telltale of this install.

That pin needs to move in the slot in most cases. It cannot hit the arm on the bottom (pin too high) or front/back (arc not true).

That's a slick setup, Inda. This is it? ...:

KX clamp mount
'Backwards' for computer

Nothing 'special' from that?

The clamp for a KX had no trouble fitting the KDX? Not a lot of grinding involved to make it fit?

Are your bars particularly 'forward' due to the stabilizer? How 'bout this..what is the alignment of the cross bar comparted to the handlebar? If you eyeball it to be inline with the bars, does the brace split the top clamp bolts?

Does your damper say 'Scotts' on the top and 'Ohlins' on the side?

Colorado Mike · Post by **Colorado Mike** » 03:41 pm Mar 31 2009

The arm is no different length at least in my case cuz I'm the one that turned it around. My setup is a lot like Inda's except totally different in that I have the Scotts upper triple clamp cuz I wanted to use fat bars and cycra hand guards that mount to the triple clamps. The stock '03 KX upper triple has the bolts on the too wrongest side, so can't be adapted to the cycra mount.

I'll measure the length of the arm when I have time, which is probably gonna be a long time from now.

Post by **Indawoods** » 03:43 pm Mar 31 2009

Yes sir... it does say Ohlins on it... cool huh?

It is a KX clamp, made to mount the Scott's reversed. I called Scott's and they worked everything out for me and sold me the right clamp. You will notice that KDXRIDER.NET is in their links page... there IS a reason!

The arm is nothing special... it is just reversed... I didn't have to buy the special tool since they sold it to me already turned around.

BTW... the pin should be as close to center of the slot in the arm as possible....

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 03:54 pm Mar 31 2009

I suppose you're gonna make me beg, 'Pretty please...PLEASE tell me why?'

Why Ohlins?

Post by **Indawoods** » 03:58 pm Mar 31 2009

Because it's Ohlin's technology.

If you want a clamp like mine... I can go get the stock number off of it.

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 04:01 pm Mar 31 2009

Some are some aren't?

They're not all like that:

This was wriiten a month ago:

http://easterndirt.com/wp-content/themes/mimbo/?p=1047

..and the Ohlins and Scotts are not at all the same thing. The Ohlins takes a 'custom' top headset bearing!!??

I didn't realize there were any 'co-ventures' between the two.

Ohlins stuff has always been killer 'spensive that I've seen.

Post by **Indawoods** » 04:11 pm Mar 31 2009

In the beginning... back in 1955... man didn't know about a rock n roll show... and all that jive...

Anyway... Ohlins developed the valving for the Scott's damper. So, you may run across one that says Scotts and one thet says Ohlins but there is no difference really other than Scotts charged less for theirs.

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 04:20 pm Mar 31 2009

The Ohlin's is hundreds more dollars. Most of that being the bearing replacement, I'd guess.

And..theirs mounts under 'standard' bars. Unlike Scotts (unless it's all backwards like yours!). I'm sayin' the case is a whole lot different.

Was last month, anyway.

Anyway...it looks good. ...wish I had one...

Post by **Indawoods** » 04:29 pm Mar 31 2009

I bought mine 6 years ago... they didn't look like that then! Both Ohlins and Scotts were the same... but Ohlins always charged more for theirs. Scotts has an in house machining department, that's why they can charge less. Ohlins was not set up to machine their own so Scotts machined theirs too.

pjmac28 · Post by **pjmac28** » 06:16 pm Mar 31 2009

canyncarvr wrote:Seeing as both of you have one...what is the length of the arm on each? I'm curious if Inda's is simply turned around..or is a different length.

The arm length of mine is 68.5mm (+/- .5 mm). I need to find my digital micrometer.

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 06:53 pm Mar 31 2009

The attaching screws..do they fit through plain holes with nuts on them...or probably they screw into the clamp, right?

I don't know why it would be hard to just bolt the thing to my WER plate..attach it using the same hardware the WER uses. I want a 'low' mount anyway.........

I know! Someone that has a 'spare' lying around should send to me so I can see if I can either bolt it to my existing plate...or just MAKE a plate to fit. I'll check the mail tonight just to see if someone anticipated my need for a Scotts!!!

Post by **Indawoods** » 06:57 pm Mar 31 2009

Not adjustable on the fly that way... so that would be a crappy way to mount the bling.

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 07:05 pm Mar 31 2009

OK.

I adjust my WER on the fly. It's adjustment knob sure ain't as user friendly as the Scotts is. Maybe I'm just gifted dexteriously speaking.

Besides...the mantra is 'form follows function'. The lower the damper mounts, the closer to the point of inflected force it is...the better it will work.

Besides THAT...it's where I wanna put it.

Post by **Indawoods** » 07:11 pm Mar 31 2009

With that mentality... your WER should work allot better than my Scotts... or at least equally as well since it is so close to the force it is trying to overcome vs my Scotts better dampening force in it's crappy location.

With that said... there are other options out there.... What they are I am not interested in at the moment since I have enough wrapped up in my setup as it is.

I know there is a remote setup from GPR I think...

canyncarvr · Post by **canyncarvr** » 08:11 pm Mar 31 2009

Indawoods wrote:With that mentality......

That's a leap of logic I can't get to from here...no matter where 'here' is.

With that mentality....a dog turd would work as well as your Scotts?

No. Because a dog turd isn't a Scotts.

Neither is a WER a Scotts.

From one mounting position being superior to another, one can assume that all dampers are the same?

I prefer N.Y. strip to sirloin. And you know what THAT means!!

Bacon is made out of hamburger!

With that mentality...I have a brand new outlook on life! I will look at moment arms, levers, and leverage in a whole new way!!

Does this mean you won't be sending me your Scotts for testing?