I want to lower my 1996 CBR1000F. How do i do it? Any kits?

 

You might be able to lower the rear by simplyreducing the preload on the rear spring. There is a preload adjustment bolton the right side of the bike, somewhere above the right footpeg. Perhaps you need to remove the right side quarter panel under the saddle and tank to see it, I’m not quite sure. You also need to lower the frontabout the sameso the bike doesn't under-steer due to a lowered rear. Normally one can do that by loosing the tripple clamp and pull up the fork legs some, and then tight it up again. Or there may be spacers in the fork legson top of the fork springs, that can be cutted to reduce the preload and height of the front.

I don’t know if there are lowering kits available, hopefully other knows more about this. In severe cases people leave the saddle to a shop to lower the saddle itself. If you have plenty of time, patience and some mechanical skills, I guess links around the rear shock can be modified to lower the bike.

 

I had a 1994 1000f and lowered the front to "level" the bike !! What I did was loose the triple tree's and slid the forks up !! This has to be measured exactly the same on both sides to keep the front end alignment true! I think I lowered mine about an 1 1/2 worked great for me!!
Good luck

 

If you want to lower the rear just use a shock of an 89-90 Model as they are shorter. If you want to Lower the front then just push it through the clamps

 

90 + shocks are longer? how much will that raise the back of the bike

 

'90 and up are the same length. '93 and up have a slightly less overall travel, about 1/8" at the shock, but still have the same overall length, eye to eye, and fully extended. I don't know the specific ratio of the suspension linkage on these but it's typically around 3X. As such, it would suggest about 3/8" less rear suspension travel.

Also, the linkage rocker and links are the same from '90 and up. The swingarms, I am 90% sure aren't the same so theoretically could have a bearing on this but I think it's more about brake anchors for the different calipers used with linked brakes than ride height, if there even is a difference.

Also, that is based on the US. There was no '89 or '92 model marketed here. I have started to understand that the rest of the world's '89 was the same as released here in '90 and the '92 was the same as the '90 and '91 here but I do NOT know that for sure. Maybe someone else in the world could verify those models and variations. I also have no direct knowledge about the '88 and earlier shocks. They could be different length but I don't know that.

 

so a new shock really wouldn't help, how can i jack the back up alittle

 

anyone ever raise up the rear alittle?

 

I have not done it but have looked at it to see if it could easily be done. No, it wouldn't be easy, like shimming a clevis, as is an option on some sportbikes. The lower clevis on these have the rebound adjuster in them and as such, suspect it also has seals that I fear would be disturbed if the joint were tampered with and the thread engagement may not be sufficient if shims were added. That's where I stopped. It was not a priority, just something I might have messed with if it had been convenient.

What you could do is remake the rear links. I've not done that on this bike but have done it on other bikes, especially EX-500's. On those, for the street it's nice but for the track, it's mandatory.

If you decide to try this, you'll first want to determine the ratio of the linkage so you can accurately determine what changes you're making. Other items that will probably be OK but should be checked to be sure is the chain clearance over the swingarm and all of the linkage clearances, especially if the original profile of the links is not duplicated.

To determine the ratio, with the bike on the centerstand, you can remove one of the linkage bolts and substitute different sized pins, measure the travel at the wheel, then calculate the ratio. This will not be corrected for the arc of the suspension movement but will be accurate enough for this purpose. I have used pin punches to get the ratio measurements. About 1/2" pin for the first measurement, then 1/8" pin for the second. Insert each pin, lift the wheel to take all play out, then record the wheel position dimension. Accurate measurements of the pin diameters (calipers) as well as accurate measurements of the wheel travel (tape measure, but carefully) are important as the ratio will be in the range of 3 times the shock travel, maybe more. Every measurement error at the links will be in the range of 3x at the wheel. Don't use up fab tolerance in these measurements.

To measure wheel travel it is handy to fix the tape measure to the bike's bodywork. A piece of duct tape on the body to protect the finish, then duct tape the tape measure to the body, hanging in line with the axle with the tape extended and locked, to assure repeatable measurements of wheel travel. (The tape rig's also handy for checking sag.)

Due to the relatively high caster angle of these, a change as much as 1 1/2" at the wheel might be nice, but again, I don't have any direct experience with these to say that for sure. That IS the kind of change we make on the EX's for the same reasons that these might benefit, lighter steering and additional corner clearance. On most modern sportbikes that already have reduced caster angles and steer lightly, this would be too much. Most of those, if it's even done, are changed in the range of 1/4". One indicator of exceeding the limit is excessive wandering of the rear on hard braking.

This is an item I might play with at some later date but with my track schedule I am hardly riding this right now, much less finding time to mess with the suspension.

 

What about welding a new mount at the top so that the bolt hole end up being lower?

Being a steel frame it surely must be easier to fabricate a new top mount.