(05-13-2014, 10:40 PM)The Spaceman_imp Wrote:

(05-12-2014, 12:56 PM)Greg_imp Wrote: I like to understand how everything works on my motorcycle. The control that is designed with the most adjustability is the gear shifter. Having this set up right makes riding easier and reduces a potential source of distraction. Besides, it's a cool little mechanism and easy to adjust to fit your unique situation.

A few years ago I had reconstructive surgery on my left foot. Several joints were immobilized and my range of motion is smaller than normal, so I have had to adjust the shifter to suit. I understood the idea behind displacing the shifter pivot away from the transmission spindle but until I did the following drawings I didn't really appreciate the beauty of this mechanism.

Displacing the shifter pivot allows the designers to position it in the right place without regard to where the spindle is, and also use differing arm lengths to control the amount of force needed to execute a shift.



Above is the normal geometry of the shifter. I would assume this is how it comes from the factory, but since I adjusted mine before taking a close look and measuring it, I'm not sure of that.



Above shows upshifting and downshifting behind the normal, at rest position.



When linkage length is about 3.86” (98mm) and the spindle dots are aligned, right angles are formed at both linkage connections; to the lever and to the arm.

Gear changes require a 10° rotation of the transmission spindle, which takes about 1.04” (26.5mm) of gearshift foot peg travel.

The spindle is splined with a 12° pitch which raises or lowers the gearshift foot peg about 1.25” (31.75mm) if the gearshift arm is moved one spline.

For finer adjustments than 1.25” you have to change the linkage length. Facing the bike, the left end is reverse threads. Both 10mm nuts must be loosened so the rod can be turned.

This mechanism is designed to be adjustable to suit individual preferences but it works best with ideal geometry.

I felt the need to disclaim this post. I hope it doesn't spoil it for you.

If we have threads on hacking the ECU without disclaimers, we can probably safely have a thread on adjusting a lever...

(05-23-2014, 09:58 AM)JohnNevets_imp Wrote: Thanks much for sharing Greg. You have a real talent.

I come from a engineering background and am more comfortable with CAD/ Solid modeling programs, and used to be able to create good looking drawings similar to yours (haven't done it in a while, not sure I could still get something looking quite that good). But I was working on another hobby with about 1/2 the folks coming from more of a graphic design background (who liked to use photoshop/ ilistrator), and 1/2 coming from a more technical background (who liked to use CAD). We could all make good looking accurate drawings when we used our tool of choice, but would have a heck of a time if we tried doing it in the other. Some took it personally, as to witch was better, but most of us realized the program was just a tool and some where better at one then the other. Don't know where I was really going with this, but just to say you done did good.

(06-29-2014, 03:25 PM)pekingduck_imp Wrote: Greg, back on the topic of limited range of motion, I modified my shifter to effectively shorten the throws. Normal shift lever position has the shift lever rubber a little above the foot, so you have to move your foot under to upshift. To downshift, you have to lift your foot up first, above the rubber.
I made a little bracket that I bolted to the shifter, with a rubber footpad on it. It has to be adjusted and set up for your particular shoe, but once adjusted, your foot stays in a normal comfortable position, with the shift rubber above your toes, and the footpad below the ball of your foot.
Shifting up or down is quicker, with much less movement. I've had this on my Bonneville T100 for years, and it worked flawlessly.

(05-23-2014, 05:18 AM)shdwghst457_imp Wrote: Smidge is Australian? Blimey, I knew I was adopted!

(05-14-2014, 04:36 AM)Greg_imp Wrote:

(05-14-2014, 12:48 AM)shdwghst457_imp Wrote: Was that done in SolidWorks?

Adobe Illustrator

Adobe Illustrator
Ah. SolidWorks is amazing; you could reproduced a working 3D model of the mechanism, test it's limits and whatnot. It would even give you a bill of materials!

(07-02-2017, 02:50 AM)Lord Popgun_imp Wrote: I don't remember it being a problem when I adjusted mine (in 2013). Tighten one, then do the other. You may have to hold the ball joint. Can't remember, but it wasn't a problem.

How tight? Well, good and snug. But since you asked. When no torque value is specified, you use the Standard Torque Values table. In the '13 manual it is on page 1-9. In the '14 manual it is on page 1-12 at the top.