Ohlins ITC lengths for '83/'84 WR/CR

[Kartwheel68]

I did a search and saw some discussion of the different lengths of ITC shocks on the WRs and CRs. Someone mentioned that the shocks are all the same, there are different thickness internal spacers to set the length for the WR and CR applications. I have an '83 175WR with the Betor ITCs, which are blown. I might later take them apart and see if the Ohlins internals will fit, but in the mean time I bought some Ohlins ITCs for a CR on eBay for $157. The 175s had less travel (9.8") than the 250/430 (10.6"). I want to keep the WR low as I have an '82 XC that I will keep set up with long travel.

Does anyone know for certain what the thickness of the WR, CR internal spacers are, and what the overall length of the two shock specs were? Works Performance lists their application as 18.5" for a CR with ITCs and 18" for a WR. Does that sound right?

 

[Kartwheel68]

I bought CR length Ohlins on eBay, I need to know how long the WR shocks were.

 

[ruwfo]

I have these all stock Huskys. 1) 83 250XC which is the same suspension as the CR has ITC 18.5 c-c, 2) 82 250WR has 17" c-c Ohlins piggy back, & 3) 82 430CR has 17.25 c-c Ohlins piggy back. I believe the 83-85 ITC have different length bottom swingarm mounts, that's
how they changed the WR & CR/XC lengths....Husky John

 

[street2dirt]

And I just checked the 85 125WR, they are 18.25. ITCs and yes the swingarm mounting locations are different

 

[Kartwheel68]

Ah, so the '85 WR has 18.25" shock length and the CR/XC is 18.5", and they moved the lower shock mount on the WRs?

 

[Kartwheel68]

I'm going to go out right now and measure the Betor ITCs and see how long they are. These CR Ohlins I got on eBay for $157 are in perfect working condition except the bottoming bumpers are gone.

 

[Kartwheel68]

The Ohlins ITC shocks I bought on eBay that were said to be from an '83 CR are 18" and the Betor ITCs that came on my '83 175WR are 17.75". I put the Ohlins on the bike and the rear end is slightly higher (obviously) but not much. I think with the slightly longer shocks and the stock 9.8" travel front forks it might end up being a pretty good setup for tighter cross country courses.

 

[SA63]

i have rebuilt several sets and they also come with different spacers inside depending on model. The longer the spacer the shorter the shock, so they can be fine tuned to what you want.

 

[suprize]

dont frget you can adjust the fork length with wr vs cr damper rods and sliders

 

[Kartwheel68]

I will probably shorten my '82 XC forks to 11" travel to sharpen the turning by putting a rebound spring in it. I'm only 5'7" so I want the '83 WR to retain its lower seat height for tighter courses and keep the XC long travel for open courses. The 18" Ohlins do make the WR a little taller at the back, but that should also help turning. I'll try them as is before I shorten them to 17.75", the length of the Betors that it came with.

 

[jimspac]

You can shorten with a 1" long PVC pipe length under the head of each dampening rod

 

[Kartwheel68]

I will use a spring under the head of the damper rod instead of a spacer, I have never been happy with the Husky forks top out issue. I can shorten the fork and get a real top out spring at the same time.

 

[hva-factory]

When you Disassemble the shocks, there are spacers between the seal head and the piston. You can remove or add to these to change the shock overall length. With the ITC shock, they have a piston that enters a hole to give a hydraulic bottoming device. I remove these (or actually, it is easier to leave it in position and remove the alloy sleeve that the piston enters) and use a conventional Ohlins bump stop on the outside of the shock rod. The thinking here is that if you compress the shock really quickly - the ITC device hydraulic locks - which is why the shafts are often bent, and why Ohlins latest products have reverted to the good old - old fashioned bump stop. Also, you often find the 'topping - out' 18m/m dia spring inside is broken. Replace this spring before you re-assemble. ITC's ran 7.5w oil...
Andy.

 

[firecrackerkid]

The thinking here is that if you compress the shock really quickly - the ITC device hydraulic locks - which is why the shafts are often bent, and why Ohlins latest products have reverted to the good old - old fashioned bump stop.

20 miles of whoops +350lbs = bent shaft. At least now I know why. Looks like the are going back to Drew for an update.

 

[Chayzed Pilot]

From my limited experience with Ohlin's. The hydraulic lock "may" contribute to the shafts bending but there are also side loads during the operation of the shocks. The real problem is the shafts are extremely soft. I had to straighten one with a press and they are like butter. Chuck Curnutt found this out in his early development of long travel shocks and hardened the shafts on his shocks. It is very, very hard to bend a Curnutt.

 

[Joe Chod]

drew uses old fashioned bump stops on ITCs instead of the washer thin one with the 4 slightly raised "Nubbins"

 

[GaryM]

drew uses old fashioned bump stops on ITCs instead of the washer thin one with the 4 slightly raised "Nubbins"

My question is a bit different. So I have 3 sets of ITCs here - all seem to be off WRs. Not sure yet? Have not worked with these yet. So what is the true shock shaft travel on each shock. This is so I can tell what space limiter is in place inside each pair before I have to disassemble shock to tell.

Purpose? Why? As I understand even with shock limiter removed from ITC it will not match the shock shaft travel of the 81 or 82 year piggyback Ohlins. The travel was gained on the different mounting angle on 83s? These are my questions.

Because I would like to put one pair on an 81 82 frame and use the others on 83 84 frames in future. Using shorter mount eyelet on shock for 81 frame.

So did Kartwheel answer this question completly in first paragraph ?

 

[suprize]

note the ITC's have a longer lower mount length as well.