Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

Ness versus Regular...suspension

8K views 38 replies 9 participants last post by  PaddyMcQ 
#1 · (Edited)
Twice now I have scrapped my cross over pipe. Once leaving my drive way when it scrapped on that 40 degree curb (I went down it in a slant with the curb on my right - not straight on) and the other was in a curve where there was a bump in the road while turning right. No, it wasn't a radical turn at any level.

I know the Ness' are 2" lower than the non Ness. If, and I say IF I wanted to get her to the "normal" height of a non Ness, is it just the rear shock that's different in the back? What's different in the front, if anything.

Aside from the scraping, getting her up will eleviate the issues associated with installing a hitch on a Ness. I need to do this over the winter.

I'm 6'3" so the lower stance of the Ness does nothing for me. I searched and got the Ness primarily because of the paint. The other changes are just a bonus to some degree so changing some things is ok with me. Function first is my goal.
 
#2 ·
So how heave are you. You have to put air in the shock for your weight. My 08 is as or lower then the ness models and I have no bottoming problems. But you have to watch and learn that some bumps and drive ways are dangerous.
You haven't had the bike that long so you just have to learn its a low slung bike.
 
#3 ·
Dude, I know you have to put air in for each load. I'm 245lbs.

It's not getting the right air in for the setup I am speaking of. The Ness IS lower by it's build. PERIOD!

I found out on parts diagrams and such that the rear shock and the shock cam ARE different for the Ness'. That is what must be changed out.

1" can make a huge difference. 2" can make even that much more. I am intimately familiar with ground clearances and how little a change can make in the long run (offloading madness, rock climbing, buggy builds etc).
 
#4 ·
Twice now I have scrapped my cross over pipe. Once leaving my drive way when it scrapped on that 40 degree curb (I went down it in a slant with the curb on my right - not straight on) and the other was in a curve where there was a bump in the road while turning right. No, it wasn't a radical turn at any level.

I know the Ness' are 2" lower than the non Ness. If, and I say IF I wanted to get her to the "normal" height of a non Ness, is it just the rear shock that's different in the back? What's different in the front, if anything.
I haven't looked under the Vision, but I'm pretty sure it's like my XR. Mine has a shock and dog bone that sit vertically next to one another on a common linkage. I'm pretty sure that to lower it, you just change the length of the dog bone. You could go to the Victory site and pull up the rear suspension parts and check out the part number you got versus the one you'd need. Ground clearance is one of the best parts of the Vics. Shame they go screw it up to make some bikes more fashionable.
 
#5 ·
The shock/spring is shorter on the Ness. The Cam (which connects to the shock and that bone you speak of) is also different. Looking at the parts schematic, those 2 parts (shock and cam) are the only thing that should have to be swapped out. Dog bone is the same on both models.

With the way the Ness family does their bikes, chopping and lowering seems to be the standard. That has their place and I like mine. BUT... for what I'll be doing with it, I could use it higher.
 
#6 ·
So I guess I've sort of answered my own question.

Now to decide if it's worth the cost to convert. Time, tools, space, and ability aren't an issue.

I wonder if there's anyone with a non-Ness Vision that would like to lower and swap parts. I wonder....
 
#8 · (Edited)
....I wonder if there's anyone with a non-Ness Vision that would like to lower and swap parts. I wonder....
Mike - I have a '11 Ness Cross Country and have considered lowering it. I am KNOW that it was the same seat height as the non-Ness XC (26.1"). Since the Vision and the XC both share the same "core" frame, I would suspect that the suspension components are also the same. If that is the case, I would gladly swap with you. We may need some time to sort through the details though.

Many dealer's offer 3rd-party components to lower the cross-frame bikes and some are as inexpensive as $150 so I don't think you need to swap the shock at all. May just need to change the air pressure in the stock shock to adapt it to the lower setting (and visa-versa for raising it...I would assume).
 
#7 ·
A little more to ponder.

I don't have my '12 service manual yet but I've been looking at a '08-'10 manual. That manual has different rockers for the Ness and Non-Ness and doesn't distinguish a different shock/spring.

From that manual:

Text Line art Circle Line Font


BUT....looking at the '12 parts schematic, it doesn't show a different rocker BUT does different shock setups.

I'll have to stay inquisitive at the moment until my service manual gets delivered to see if the builds are different from '10 to '12.
 
#9 ·
I'm going to stop in and chat with tech guys tomorrow afternoon. I will pick their brains and see what they say. I'll find out about our two bikes too.
 
#10 ·
#11 · (Edited)
Do not TEMPT me Mike! lol... I said I was NOT going to start MODDING my VV and have barely been able to maintain that statement through the use of such phrases as "Safety Lighting", Communications Equipment, "Heat Reducing ingnition improvments", and of course "Wind Managment accesory"... lol

Are you saying that the rocker is what lowers the bike 1" that you want to swap and/or the shock another 1"? Unfamiliar with the Ness configuration and obviously I am riding a stock suppesion on my 11 and not sure if your wanting to swap both shock and rocker or just rocker.
 
#12 ·
Face it, nothing is just as you want it right out the box. You have to do something to personalize your ride right? Problem is, once you start, it's hard to stop :)

I'm not 100% sure right now what's done to lower the Ness. It "appears" it's just the shock on the post '10 bikes. But it's definitely both the shock and clevis on the '10s.

I will know for sure by the end of the day. My service manual will be here and I will speak to the experts this afternoon.

I'll post up my findings.
 
#13 ·
My local dealership was useless. No clue. They even tried to tell me my HID driving light was just a bulb change. Idiots!
 
#14 · (Edited)
Hmmm,,,,, lots of people have been adjusting ride height for a lot of years on a lot of bikes using different length leveling links. (The "dog bones" you are talking about).
If you insist on changing the shock and spring, you might give some folks a little credit and try the links out. Think outside the box and don't use the stock, aka Vic version. Lloyds, and Witchdoctor have the links and the knowledge on how to use them. Give one or both a call and see what you can learn from them.You may get what you are looking for without all the fuss and muss you seem to be afraid of. You'll have the same travel and springs, but height will be taller. If you want longer travel, ok but you asked how to raise the ride.
Chance are, you'll end up having to use different links anyway, and if not you can sell them here.
You asked for advice, just because it wasn't the answer you expected doesn't always mean it was wrong.

Just a thought.
 
#15 ·
Wow, that came across as harsh! Not sure what I said that seems to have you in a twist.

My point, and ultimate question is pretty simple. I am looking to find out exactly what's different between the Vision suspension and the Ness Vision suspension. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm not interested at this point in aftermarket options or solutions. Yes, they definitely have their places but that's not where I am at right now.

I am not really interesting in "modifying" the bike to alter it's suspension height. By that I mean aftermarket "tweaks". If I can get it up to non-Ness height by swapping out a few parts from the regular Visions then I'd like to know that.

If that's the case and someone out there wanted to lower theirs like a Ness then we can kill two birds with one stone (and no cost other than time).

I'm definitely not afraid of muss, as you put it. What I'm not willing to do is experiment.

I'm doing my own fact checking the best I can. I have factory manuals and schematics. What I don't have is the actual knowledge of the two suspensions. Like I wrote earlier, neither does my local dealership.
 
#16 · (Edited)
Wow, that came across as harsh! Not sure what I said that seems to have you in a twist.
I think he's saying that you don't REALLY need to go through everything you are going through on this. It's really not that complicated. You can simply swap those links with someone and ...you are done. You don't really NEED to do anything on the shock...at least nobody who has ever lowered their bikes has ever done anything with their shocks. They simply replace the link and go on their merry way.

However, I am a bit like you (analytical engineer mindset) and want to know all the details of what (might be) the correct way to do things so that one can understand such a pursuit and those details might just make the modifications for the rest of us even better (in the future) so I say "if it makes you happy to dig until you learn WHY the earth is round..... then GO FOR IT". Just don't expect that anyone else here (or anyway) has tried digging as deep as you appear to be on this particular subject thumb up thumb up

In my case, I wanted to understand what the horsepower differences were in the alternative pipe options on the market. Figuring that I wanted to get an aftermarket pipe that sounded good but could also add the most horsepower. I learned from a number of sources that the Ness Big Honkers were able to add from 5 to 6 HP to the bike. Some gave me crap because the difference in HP was negligible. Others asked me why I would even BOTHER to care about a 2 HP difference between aftermarket pipes AT ALL and admonished me for even PRESENTING the question as it wasn't "worthy" of an answer, etc... In the end, I also decided I was getting a bit "anal" in my analysis and others (obviously) weren't interested in "playing the game" to it's ultimate conclusion. So, while I did find some empirical evidence that provided me a baseline hypothesis, others probably thought I was CRAZY! LOL. I knew that the newer Ness Thunderheaders were scheduled to come out and had heard that their performance and sound was even better so I put my pipe search on the back burner. The Thunderheaders came out and were $800 so I basically gave up on changing my pipes at all until next summer...
 
#17 · (Edited)
To follow through with your thinking on the links.....if that's true, then why is there a different shock for the two models? I don't believe for a second that they are identical and it's just a way for Victory to make more money on those who blow out a Ness shock. They hook up the same, the air lines hook up and route the same.

Without knowing that, changing out a link could have ramifications unknown if indeed the shock is different.

The bikes are more or less the same weight and same ride characteristics. Why is there a completely different air pressure chart to use for the Ness? Since ride and load characteristics are directly related to the pressure required for a given load, if all that's different is a link to affect the height, why the different PSI's.

Text


I want to understand my bike.

EDIT: Just looking more closely at that chart. Mentions nothing about a Ness without a trunk. A dramatic PSI increase in the non-Ness by just adding the trunk. What affect on the suspension and appropriate PSI should I be thinking of without my trunk?

Cause and affect!
 
#19 ·
...why is there a different shock for the two models? ... Since ride and load characteristics are directly related to the pressure required for a given load, if all that's different is a link to affect the height, why the different PSI's.
View attachment 8885

What affect on the suspension and appropriate PSI should I be thinking of without my trunk?
As for the pressure differences, it seems obvious to me that... Since the links for the Ness version are shorter, they (logically) compress the shock more (from the very beginning) so it makes sense that they start at higher pressures. Also, the shorter travel distance (due to the shorter run length available in the already compressed shock) would limit the "give" in the bike which will consequently also make the ride more "taught".
 
#18 ·
I thought some of your comments kind of twisted too, as in panties. LOL
You asked for expert opinions, I gave you two of what seem to be some of the best in Victory mods and upgrades. It is up to you to use them. If you need more info on them. I or someone else would be happy to provide a link, phone number, address. We are here to help each other.
As for the "why different shocks", well there are a lot of reasons for that, but most of them have nothing to do with ride height. The leveling links will raise the chassis, and shouldn't have any effect on the suspension, per say.

Happy Hunting, and Happy Thanksgiving too.

cheers
 
#20 ·
That makes sense. That would mean then that the Ness rides stiffer than the non-Ness sort of speak?
 
#21 · (Edited)
Correct...with both at their "lowest possible" settings, the Ness would be a good bit stiffer. However, you can make the XC-equivalent to that "base Ness" simply by pumping the shock up to the 225lb setting (7th up from lowest pressure).

I do not even bother changing my pressures AT ALL. Regardless of having the trunk on or off, I leave the pressure setting the same & to be completely honest, I don't even recall where I have it set. One note is that the heaviest person I have on the back is my 65lb boy as the wife is scared of leaving both children without parents should she even ride across the street with me on it (seriously).
 
#23 · (Edited)
BBob,

You've done and wrote up exactly what I did earlier. You did the same research too but when I started I started with the '10 (I believe) service manual, which did show the different shocks and clevis/rocker. Now I know that's not the case for my '12.

Many have thought the "bone" is different or that's what could be changed out to gain height. That might be true but if that is an acceptable method I'd be curious as to why that wasn't the way Victory lowered the Ness's. There must be a design or performance reason. Another member here was kind enough to PM me with an extremely knowledgable person's contact info to question. I plan to do that tomorrow.

Aside from opinions and aftermarket input, it does APPEAR that the SHOCK/Spring Is the component that Victory uses between the two models for the different heights.

Edit: I can't see any differences in the front suspension, from any source.

I do now have a 2012 Vision service manual.
 
#25 ·
Please don't apologize. What you came up with validated my research and conclusion thus far. I appreciate it!!!

Happy Thanksgiving!!!
 
#26 ·
This just keeps getting better and better. I found after I searched again the part diagrams for the FRONT suspension components, the cartridge, spring, and the forks are actually different between the Ness's and Non-Ness VV. Your assumption was correct that the front ends are indeed different too. Damn!!!
 
#28 ·
I'll let you know. I found out this morning that it IS just the shock that's different in the rear. But discovering that the front internals are different too I may do nothing. I will install the hitch this winter and see how it all works with just adding more air.


Sent from my iPhone using Motorcycle.com App
 
#29 ·
I'll let you know. I found out this morning that it IS just the shock that's different in the rear. But discovering that the front internals are different too I may do nothing. I will install the hitch this winter and see how it all works with just adding more air.
The dog bones appear to be the same across the models, it is only the shock that changes. Interestingly, the Ness is the same as the old 8 ball shock. The diagrams don't show it being shorter, but it must be if the bike is lowered and the dog bones are the same.

I read somewhere that the force per mm of shock compression was considerably higher on the Ness version. One would conclude it is a much stiffer shock, presumably to prevent it from bottoming out since it has less travel.

What was different in the front end, springs / spacers?

The cruiser models use coil spring shocks and most of the new ones use a "lowered" shock compared to what was used on the Kingpin. The lowered shocks have a lot stiffer spring and/or damping components in them too. The new cruisers ride very stiff compared to the KP.
 
#31 ·
From the parts schematic for the '12 Visioon:

Text Diagram Technical drawing Drawing Parallel


The following parts are different between the Ness and non:

The Lower Forks (not numbered)
#20 - Cartridge
#22 - Spring
#23 - Cap
#25 - Spacer
 
#33 ·
Basically the guts of the forks then.

Yeah. Tough decision on a brand new bike. Probably be around $1500 or more with labor to change the rear shock and these parts.

If it were me; I'd just ride it the way it is and see if it is gonna be ok like you mentioned Mike. You can always change them later if you decide to go that route. I'm sure you would have no trouble finding someone with a late model Vision to exchange parts with if that's what you wanted to do.

Good luck with it. I think we all learned something from this thread...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top