Full rear mudguard

[Gimlet]

I'm going to try this initially. Ifit works I'llstick with it. If not, I'll be into one-off fabricating.

Shop

CarbonFBR has the worlds largest range of Triumph & Ducati carbon fibre/fiber parts under one roof. We are the leader in making OEM and bespoke/unique carbon parts for the Triumph and Ducati model ranges. As we are part of the motorcycle community we listen to advice and input and design and...

www.triumphcarbon.com

 

[Jagster]

I'm going to try this initially. Ifit works I'llstick with it. If not, I'll be into one-off fabricating.

Shop

CarbonFBR has the worlds largest range of Triumph & Ducati carbon fibre/fiber parts under one roof. We are the leader in making OEM and bespoke/unique carbon parts for the Triumph and Ducati model ranges. As we are part of the motorcycle community we listen to advice and input and design and...

www.triumphcarbon.com

If your goal is to stop spray going all up your back, I wouldn't recommend that as a solution.

What you really need to do to solve that particular issue is close the gap (or eliminate any gap) between the top of the scorpions tail and the rear light.

I have an extended hugger from powerbronze and it does help reduce a bit of grime getting on to the rear shock assembly, but not much.

The full length TRIK rear fender functions at a whole other level. No comparison.

The best solution would be if TRIK could produce their fender in carbon.....
...er....well that's not quite right......THE best solution would be my fender design in carbon fibre

Though I accept that people don't often make choices on functionality alone and that aesthetics play a big part in choosing what they go for. In which case what we probably all want is no fenders of any kind, so if someone can devise an invisible forcefield to control the spray, that would fly off the shelves......except you wouldn't see it flying off the shelves......it is invisible after all.....

 

[Gimlet]

If your goal is to stop spray going all up your back, I wouldn't recommend that as a solution.

What you really need to do to solve that particular issue is close the gap (or eliminate any gap) between the top of the scorpions tail and the rear light.

I have an extended hugger from powerbronze and it does help reduce a bit of grime getting on to the rear shock assembly, but not much.

The full length TRIK rear fender functions at a whole other level. No comparison.

The best solution would be if TRIK could produce their fender in carbon.....
...er....well that's not quite right......THE best solution would be my fender design in carbon fibre

Though I accept that people don't often make choices on functionality alone and that aesthetics play a big part in choosing what they go for. In which case what we probably all want is no fenders of any kind, so if someone can devise an invisible forcefield to control the spray, that would fly off the shelves......except you wouldn't see it flying off the shelves......it is invisible after all.....

I can see how a proper rear fender rather than stupid boot scraper thing will keep crud off your back, and it certainly looks good, but my main concern is keeping the rear shock, linkage and swinging arm pivot cleaner.
The boot scraper is there purely to show off the fat rear tyre, presumably to make the bike look big and butch. In fact I think it looks daft as well as being wildly impractical. Your fender extender not only works better but looks vastly more pleasing - to my eyes at any rate. However I'm not blaming Triumph. They are far from alone in this silly style affectation. But I've owned numerous bikes that had similar but shorter rear fenders to yours yet still managed to keep the rear shock clean with a hugger design that actually worked. I changed the stock hugger on my KTM 990 SMT for a Skidmarx fibreglass one which was a great improvement, but the SMT had an additional very simple solution which was a tough but flexible mud flap that hung down from front fixing point of the fender to form a curtain in front of the shock. It's a common dirt bike feature which they carried over onto their road bikes and it worked extremely well and was very unobstrusive. I may look at a similar solution for my Rocket.

You may be right about the hugger I posted. I do feel it looks too pointed and blade-like towards the rear. For a hugger to work it needs to cover the tyre's width. That one doesnt look like it does.

I would like to replicate what you have done with your fender and light cluster relocation but I can't do 3D printing and I haven't the facilities for metal fabricating so it will be a longer term project. In the meantime I just want to keep the shock area clean. I'll probably replace the hugger anyway because the stock one is completely pointeless so I'll keep looking for something wider and more affective. But I think I will look at the mud flap idea as well.

 

[Jagster]

I can see how a proper rear fender rather than stupid boot scraper thing will keep crud off your back, and it certainly looks good, but my main concern is keeping the rear shock, linkage and swinging arm pivot cleaner.
The boot scraper is there purely to show off the fat rear tyre, presumably to make the bike look big and butch. In fact I think it looks daft as well as being wildly impractical. Your fender extender not only works better but looks vastly more pleasing - to my eyes at any rate. However I'm not blaming Triumph. They are far from alone in this silly style affectation. But I've owned numerous bikes that had similar but shorter rear fenders to yours yet still managed to keep the rear shock clean with a hugger design that actually worked. I changed the stock hugger on my KTM 990 SMT for a Skidmarx fibreglass one which was a great improvement, but the SMT had an additional very simple solution which was a tough but flexible mud flap that hung down from front fixing point of the fender to form a curtain in front of the shock. It's a common dirt bike feature which they carried over onto their road bikes and it worked extremely well and was very unobstrusive. I may look at a similar solution for my Rocket.

You may be right about the hugger I posted. I do feel it looks too pointed and blade-like towards the rear. For a hugger to work it needs to cover the tyre's width. That one doesnt look like it does.

I would like to replicate what you have done with your fender and light cluster relocation but I can't do 3D printing and I haven't the facilities for metal fabricating so it will be a longer term project. In the meantime I just want to keep the shock area clean. I'll probably replace the hugger anyway because the stock one is completely pointeless so I'll keep looking for something wider and more affective. But I think I will look at the mud flap idea as well.

This photo shows my Powerbronze fender extender for reference.........

The longer huggers do make a difference, so they probably shouldn't be overlooked completely.

They are, like you say, a bit pointy, but I think that if they weren't like that, they might look very fat & clumsy.

I am currently scratching my head a bit over deciding which way to go on the same problem for my new Bottpower XR1 flat-tracker, where there currently isn't any protection from road spray.
I can get a carbon fibre hugger to fit the Buell swing-arm on that bike, but i'm holding off throwing the money into that solution, as i'm not convinced that it will solve the problem.
I was doing a bit of brain storming on the subject and I keep coming back to the thought of attaching a strip of clear PVC between the swing arm and the underside of the rear subframe, thus creating a flexible barrier to the crud heading towards the suspension assembly. Might look a bit Heath Robinson, but it might be worth trying it out.

 

[Bunny Burrell]

‘Scuze butting in, dunno if you know. Early Hinkley modular Trumpets had an infill piece of thin rubber, riveted between the under tray and the swinging arm and it was the same width as the inner width of the swinging arm. So the lower part of the shock absorber , the monoshock wishbones and bushes were protected from road crud. Sadly Triumphs deleted it fairly quickly. I’ve not seen the swinging arm, would you be able to do something like that?

 

[Jagster]

‘Scuze butting in, dunno if you know. Early Hinkley modular Trumpets had an infill piece of thin rubber, riveted between the under tray and the swinging arm and it was the same width as the inner width of the swinging arm. So the lower part of the shock absorber , the monoshock wishbones and bushes were protected from road crud. Sadly Triumphs deleted it fairly quickly. I’ve not seen the swinging arm, would you be able to do something like that?

That sounds a lot like what i've dream't up as a logical solution to the problem.
Just goes to show, new designs are very rarely completely new.....most things practical or otherwise have been done before.

 

[stingray]

TRIK got it right.

 

[Gimlet]

‘Scuze butting in, dunno if you know. Early Hinkley modular Trumpets had an infill piece of thin rubber, riveted between the under tray and the swinging arm and it was the same width as the inner width of the swinging arm. So the lower part of the shock absorber , the monoshock wishbones and bushes were protected from road crud. Sadly Triumphs deleted it fairly quickly. I’ve not seen the swinging arm, would you be able to do something like that?

That's just like the aforementioned mud flap my old KTM had. It worked very well and disappeared when the bike was viewed side on. from the back it just looked like part of the undertray/inner fender.

On that bike though, the flap was screwed on, not riveted, which was very useful as it could be removed for deep cleaning. On the KTM the undertray/inner fender was in two halves joined together with two screws. The flap was inserted in this joint so removing it was easy. I will look into doing that on the Rocket. It's tucked away in my lock-up at the moment but I'll take a look at the weekend.

The only possible issue is the KTM and the early Hinkley Triumphs had twin-spar swinging arms, not single-siders. Whether that will cause issues with this idea I don't know but I'm sure it can be got round.

 

[Gimlet]

This photo shows my Powerbronze fender extender for reference.........

The longer huggers do make a difference, so they probably shouldn't be overlooked completely.

They are, like you say, a bit pointy, but I think that if they weren't like that, they might look very fat & clumsy.

I am currently scratching my head a bit over deciding which way to go on the same problem for my new Bottpower XR1 flat-tracker, where there currently isn't any protection from road spray.
I can get a carbon fibre hugger to fit the Buell swing-arm on that bike, but i'm holding off throwing the money into that solution, as i'm not convinced that it will solve the problem.
I was doing a bit of brain storming on the subject and I keep coming back to the thought of attaching a strip of clear PVC between the swing arm and the underside of the rear subframe, thus creating a flexible barrier to the crud heading towards the suspension assembly. Might look a bit Heath Robinson, but it might be worth trying it out.

Looks great. The longer hugger finishes it off. The stock shorty looks a bit of an after-thought.

 

[Jagster]

Looks great. The longer hugger finishes it off. The stock shorty looks a bit of an after-thought.

I'm happy with both the looks and the functionality of my set-up, but it was a lot of work and if I cost my time and materials to get it all up to where it is today, there was definitely no cost benefit over going with the TRIK fender solution, like Stingray has.
I would say that the TRIK, full length hugger is the best solution for most people, but I really enjoyed doing my little project with the rear fender. I can also say that my solution has saved a good amount of weight.
Un-sprung weight....the golden ticket weight loss that the bike is crying out for, and that gives me the good feeling I need after all my sweat and toil.