'27 JD Cut Down Project - SWAN

[aumick10]

Steve,
Didn't NASA miss one of their targets because they mixed metric and imperial units?
I don't know how much braking power you have picked up, but it looks the part.

[Steve Swan]

Steve,
Didn't NASA miss one of their targets because they mixed metric and imperial units?
I don't know how much braking power you have picked up, but it looks the part.

Hey Mick! i guess i'll find out the first time i squeeze the brake lever ! it DOES, as you say, look the part. i think it'll be at least sufficient, certainly at elast as good and i wold imagine better than the original rear brake and certainly not any less than what i've seen on a number of Cannonball bikes and i sure as heck don't plan to be riding bat out of hell style around local roads and can't imagine running more than 50-55 mph tops on open highways. i actually feel half-assed comfortable riding my restored '27 on local roads with only the original rear brake, so with a perhaps slightly less than nominal front brake and a definitely less than nominal rear brake i should end up with a nominal front brake... i really wanted to keep the 21" wheel as uncluttered as possible so i think i accomplished that at least and i don't like the looks of a huge drum brake like i've seen on other customs.

[RichO]

Steve, Those will do the trick. Remember the rear brake (stock J model) will lock up the rear wheel and that's too much. You only have braking up to impending skid and lockup. The front is good for rolling up to lights, when you have your other limbs engaged, and emergencies. Your good to go.

[aumick10]

Steve,
Another month and you will have something to hang it from.
As you say, it is better than no front brake, you may be able to cruise at 60-80 mph with some confidence.
With a front and rear brake, the weight transfer gives you over 60% of your braking power on the front.
Is there something missing from the brake hub? I don't remember the fixed shoe anchor being open as it looks. I thought it was a bolted shoe anchor through the backing plate, with a nut and washer on the outside.
Cheers,
Mick.

[Steve Swan]

Steve,
Another month and you will have something to hang it from.
As you say, it is better than no front brake, you may be able to cruise at 60-80 mph with some confidence.
With a front and rear brake, the weight transfer gives you over 60% of your braking power on the front.
Is there something missing from the brake hub? I don't remember the fixed shoe anchor being open as it looks. I thought it was a bolted shoe anchor through the backing plate, with a nut and washer on the outside.
Cheers,
Mick.

Mick, if i understand correctly your observations on the fixed shoe anchor and the bolted shoe anchor:

1. the "open" hole you see is a hollow post/stud (typically a fixed shaft) the brake shoes "rotate" on. and opposite this hollow post is the fulcrum pin that expands shoes. hollow i would imagine because Kawasaki designed it to increase weight savings.

2. the hole the chrome bolt threads into is simply a through (open) hole and was Kawasaki's design to simply hold a strap in place that connected the strap from that bolt to the fork leg, this hole serves no purpose other than to fix this strap to the backing plate and to the fork leg. this through (open) hole actually comes out underneath the middle of the rear brake shoe if any of all this i wrote is coherent enough to make sense...

3. so we are looking at three things in the picture: 1. The hole the chrome bolt threads into to hold the fixing strap that keeps the baking plate from rotating. 2. The open hole (directly behind the brass cable adjusting screw) which is actually a fixed hollow post/stud the shoes "rotate" on, and 3. of course the fulcrum pin that the lever actuates that expands the brake shoe which is about 1-1/2 inches wide by 7 inches in diameter.

hope this clarifies!

YES!!!!!!! THANKS TO YOU, in another month i will have "something" to hang all my pieces i've been collecting on !!!!!! Looking forward to meeting yu and THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR GENEROUS HELP !

[Steve Swan]

PS - cruising 60-80 on that jalopy freaks me out! 55 is fast enough! or maybe a mile a minute. will be interesting to see what the fewer teeth i will be running on the engine sprocket and rear wheel sprocket will actually do....!

[Steve Swan]

Mick, what's cool if you study that brake is the fulcrum pin is hollow as well as the fixed shoe anchor and as is the main axle which i bored out to slip the original '27 axle through. High-tech 1980's motocross stuff, i am sure you noticed the Magnesium backing plate! so once i have the forks you sold me, then i can make the appropriate width spacers to center the wheel between the fork rockers and in line with the rear wheel.

[nuklhd]

Steve, I read and enjoy all of the updates and progress. other than saying I dig this build, technically I can't offer anything lol. the "love" is there friend.

[Steve Swan]

Steve, I read and enjoy all of the updates and progress. other than saying I dig this build, technically I can't offer anything lol. the "love" is there friend.

THANK YOU nuklhead! I APPRECIATE YOUR WORDS OF ENCOURAGEMENT! the project is tapping my resources, so every now and then my knee's start knockin'! but knockin' knees is nothing new to me as every spare coin i've ever had after the family is cared for and living expenses are met has ALWAYS gone to motorcycles! (and a few antique firearms, and at least an annual motorbike trip!) i'd rather use some replaceable or not otherwise terribly valuable or difficult to find oddball parts to piece the project together. so, i am using what i have or parts that have some meaning to me. My dad's first car was a 1917 Model T which i think i mentioned earlier and of course i shared the Duane Dreesen story on the Velo fishtail silencer. as out of place as some of the parts will be in respect to most the pictures of cut down's i've seen i think if i give things some thought to how to fit the parts together it will look at least as good as Frankenstein!

[Steve Swan]

My buddy Wiff weighing the lower end parts yesterday afternoon. Wiff is 76, he's been riding since he was 12, every New Year's eve right before midnight he takes his bike out and goes for a ride until right afte the clock strike midnight, that way he can say he rode out of one year and into another, Wiff hasn't missed his New Year's ride in over 40 years. He was a machinist for Kodak for 35 years. Wiff worked for a well-ran local mom & pop repair shop for 27 years along with working at Kodak; i got to work as a mechanic the last 3 years the shop was open. Ray's Motorcycle; Ray has been a locally competitive racer his entire time in the motorcycle industry, he's 70 now, he started when he was 16. attached is a picture of Ray the day i finished my '27's restoration.

20190311_165833.jpg20190311_170024.jpg20170511_122658.jpg

[T. Cotten]

I wonder, Steve,..

If that rod top would weigh different if the rod was level?

Balancing is flatulence in a hailstorm, anyway.

(Particularly without certainty of the original factor.)

....Cotten

[aumick10]

When weighing the rods, the centerline of the rods must be horizontal, regardless of which end you are weighing. If they aren't level, the weights will be slightly out.
If the total weight of each end is very close to the total rod weight, you can use a fudge factor of 1/3rd the difference applied to the top end, and 2/3rds applied to the bottom end.
You must be within a gram or two to use this, otherwise, keep weighing until you do.

Of course in the Southern hemisphere, you weight the rods upside down.
Cheers,
Mick

[T. Cotten]

But its still just a buttburp, Mick!

The percentage of a few grams is nothing.
Even less if you choose another factor.

It just makes you drill (or add) more, when you might not notice any performance difference anyway.

With a brand new modern rod, however, one must jump through the hoops.

....Cotten

[aumick10]

The balance factor is a very subjective number.
Most people wouldn't notice the difference between different balance factors, but they like to know their motor has been balanced.
What most people don't realize that any balance factor will typically only smooth out a v twin at a specific rpm. No point in balancing for 5000 rpm if you only ride at 3000 rpm.

[T. Cotten]

The balance factor is a very subjective number.
Most people wouldn't notice the difference between different balance factors, but they like to know their motor has been balanced.
What most people don't realize that any balance factor will typically only smooth out a v twin at a specific rpm. No point in balancing for 5000 rpm if you only ride at 3000 rpm.

I wouldn't say a 'specific' rpm, Mick!

I'd call it a serviceable range of rpm, with a wide plateau instead of a peak.

Too slow of an idle makes them hop, so that's definitely off the curve.

....Cotten