M696 Leaking rear shock abosorber

[Darren69]

It'd be my guess that the 696/796/1100 Monsters with the cantilever suspension the same as the old 750/900SS are oversprung to begin with, so would need a lighter spring. My SS always felt better with the Mrs on the back than it did solo. No complaints about the Showa adjustable forks either on the SS which is odd since they are the same forks and don't work as well on the Monster. Since fitting the Ohlins shock on the Monster it has made them feel worse. I suspect that again they are oversprung and the damping adjustment is inadequate or simply too crude to actually do anything worthwhile.

[Luddite]

Originally Posted by Darren69

It'd be my guess that the 696/796/1100 Monsters with the cantilever suspension the same as the old 750/900SS are oversprung to begin with, so would need a lighter spring. My SS always felt better with the Mrs on the back than it did solo. No complaints about the Showa adjustable forks either on the SS which is odd since they are the same forks and don't work as well on the Monster. Since fitting the Ohlins shock on the Monster it has made them feel worse. I suspect that again they are oversprung and the damping adjustment is inadequate or simply too crude to actually do anything worthwhile.

Hi, Utopia.

As seems the norm these days, both the standard rear shock and forks use progressive springs. I never could find out the rates for the rear spring but the fork springs are 5.5 Nm - 8.0 Nm, so pretty soft really. In comparison, the springs K-tech fitted were 8.5 Nm (linear). Also, I think the stock fork oil is 7.5 weight while K-tech used 5.0.