Reversing Marzocchi fork legs

C

CDHE

Full member
Location
Boulder, Co
Any reason not to switch left and right fork legs so that the calipers are trailing (as in most modern bikes I have come across)?
 
Musta had a longer cable fitted when I reversed mine on the Motodd, it was a straight forward conversion.
Did the same with the SFC way back when and I don't remember buying a new cable.
Now reverted to calipers back to the front again on the SFC.
 
Wheel spacing will be an issue.

The gap that is normally present between the RH slider and speedo drive, in some cases as much as 1.5mm, will be taken up, shifting the wheel and disc centre lines to the right. While the shift of the wheel itself is not much more than cosmetic, the discs may throw up clearance issues within the brake calipers.

Steve is correct. Generally, a longer speedo cable will be rquired to clear the RH caliper.

The fork drain plugs end up on the high (front) side of the legs so they won't drain completely if you're changing the fork oil. Hardly a big deal though.
Click to expand...
On the earliest models where the factory switched to rear-mounted calipers, Laverda didn't bother about that either! At least they didn't just swap the sliders around, these were modified so the axle was again inserted from the RH side.

If the wheel and mudguard are removed, the sliders can be turned 180° to let the oil to fully drain.

piet
 
Last edited:
Interesting that nobody has commented if this modification makes any noticeable difference.

I have to admit that I did not notice any difference in handling on an SF3 and a 79 JOTA back in the day.
I reverted to calipers in front of the fork leg, and much prefer that 'look anyway'.

Let the arguments begin.
 
It made a huge difference to me, well not really. I just prefer the rear calliper look, and later function with 4 spots, sorry Clem. About now I mention my need to add a washer to avoid one disc rubbing on a fork leg. Thats real controversial. That's on my 3c with Cer fork.
 
DavidH said:
Interesting that nobody has commented if this modification makes any noticeable difference.
Click to expand...

Because the difference is too small to notice within the grand Laverda scheme.

If the bikes had more sensitive steering and were more agile to begin with, it might become ever-so-slightly noticable. But on these cumbersome dinosaurs... nah, don't think so.

To use 4-pot calipers as they were designed, reversing the sliders is a must. I'm pretty certain Brembo et al would not have taken the trouble to give the caliper pistons different diametres if it didn't make any difference. They're not interested in increased manufacturing costs if these can be avoided.

piet
 
It’s a dispute worthy of the Bigendian/Littlendian wars and, it appears, of about as much consequence.
My first experience of a disc brake was on my 850 Commando, which had the caliper behind the fork leg in ‘73 and it was pretty crap. In ‘76, my Laverda had the on the front of the fork leg and they worked as well as the tyres of the day would allow.
There they will stay, until I find a compelling argument to move them.

2023 04 02 AGM 05.JPG
 
Last edited:
My Norton disc experience was you needed a grip like a Laverda Clutch required, zero chance of locking that brake. Insert petrified in front of the usual wood feel. Fun bike through, so much toque.
 
Have mounted BMW Brembo 4-pots, and based on this diagram, was thinking that I ought to flip the legs. Hopefully, I'll get the chance to wear some pads out!
 

Attachments

  • 4 pot .PNG
    4 pot .PNG
    41.7 KB · Views: 26
  • my brake.jpeg
    my brake.jpeg
    166.3 KB · Views: 26
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top