Fork oil level...

[Rothman]

Just want to verify with some of you guys that have done this several times but, Reading through my manual a 1990 600 when full, the oil level measured with the fork compressed is 3.93 inches from the top of the fork. Can anybody verify this for me?

[GytRDunKat]

Compressed? Err, I'll have to find my manual, put I'm pretty sure it's measured uncompressed.

Never mind, it says compressed. I have a manual here, let me look it up...

89-on 600 is 100 MM (3.93 inches)

[arsenic]

and honestly, who measure anything in inches, friggin inches

[GytRDunKat]

Yeah, this manual (not the one that I have a home) shows this picture...



I'm think my other manual says to measure from the very top of the fork, not the way this one shows (although, that top part may be part of the tool they made). Now I'm even more confused. After I wrote "uncompressed" I remembered that it was compressed. I forgot how scary it was when the front dropped down from the jack. The stance looked cool though

[wcj]

and honestly, who measure anything in inches, friggin inches

Right... I have to measure mine in YARDS!

[GytRDunKat]

Right... I have to measure mine in YARDS!

Dilusion is not good for motocycle riding!

[arsenic]

Right... I have to measure mine in YARDS!

still standard, that isn't cool either.

[Black_peter]

Lighten up Captain Metric..

[GytRDunKat]

Lighten up Captain Metric..

That should be his new tag line

[arsenic]

[Rothman]

I'm a machinist, everything I do is in inches!! I agree though, the metric system is way less complicated and should be the world standard. Thanks for the replies.

[Dan Dubeau]

I'm a machinist, everything I do is in inches!! I agree though, the metric system is way less complicated and should be the world standard. Thanks for the replies.

I know your world . I design using a combination of inches (for stock sizes), and millimeters (for design requirements), then convert to inches to machine it. Then I measure it (using a cmm) in mm

25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4, 25.4,25.4,25.4,
25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4, 25.4,25.4,25.4,
25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4, 25.4,25.4,25.4,
25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4, 25.4,25.4,25.4,
25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4,25.4, 25.4,25.4,25.4

I've got muscle memory down pat for typing 25.4. I practically throw my hands at a keyboard or calculator and that comes up .

[Rothman]

Got the new fork seals in today.... they are totally different from the springless versions I used last time. The quality is WAY better. I will never reccommend those springless pieces of crap to anyone. Anyway, seeing as how these are totally different, I don't know which way to put them in. Can any of you guys tell me which side faces toward the ground/bottom of the fork?

[Black_peter]

In the left photo (side view) the right seal is in the right position.

There are two wipers that point down (as if they were cutting into the fork)
One facing up. Did that make sense?

[Rothman]

If I'm tracking right.... The two smaller wipers are on the bottom when installed and the large one is on top?