Reading up on other vibrations reported in the ST. Might help me understand if they are related to the clutch basket issues I'm investigating. Came across this thread whose reported vibration may or may not be related.
Strikes me this design is perhaps flawed if the original vibration in the top yoke is a side to side movement. This is just a theory for thought perhaps read while looking at the attached.
Could be the design has created a parallelogram. Two long sides opposite each other and two short sides opposite each other. Lower long side being the new tubular link between the original bar clamps. The upper long side being those two steel links from one side to the other. Both short sides being the uprights that the new bars are mounted on. If the fork yoke moves left it will try to take the top links and bars left. Problem is the parallelogram will pivot at its four corners and the weight of each individual bar will slow the whole thing down. Left and right uprights will pivot and swing right at their joints with the lower side. Causing the weight of the left bar to rise and the top link will also encourage the right bar fall. Same happens again but all in the opposite directions as the top yoke then vibrated to the right. So a little vibration side to side of the top yoke gets magnified by the time it reaches the new handle bars. Fact the designer fitted those top links says to me they know the joint between lower long side of the parallelogram and the short vertical upright sides is not stiff enough. If stiff enough you would not need the top links. Think if you would be willing to ride with the top links removed? Probably not because your sense might tell you it does not look sturdy enough (as sturdy as stock bars) to control the weight of a large machine through.
I think the two top links should be at an angle so they make a rigid link to the bottom of opposite sides short upright links. See the yellow diagonal. Forming two rigid triangles rather than a single flexing parallelogram. Might be some scope for adding something temporary to see if it makes any difference.
Strikes me this design is perhaps flawed if the original vibration in the top yoke is a side to side movement. This is just a theory for thought perhaps read while looking at the attached.
Could be the design has created a parallelogram. Two long sides opposite each other and two short sides opposite each other. Lower long side being the new tubular link between the original bar clamps. The upper long side being those two steel links from one side to the other. Both short sides being the uprights that the new bars are mounted on. If the fork yoke moves left it will try to take the top links and bars left. Problem is the parallelogram will pivot at its four corners and the weight of each individual bar will slow the whole thing down. Left and right uprights will pivot and swing right at their joints with the lower side. Causing the weight of the left bar to rise and the top link will also encourage the right bar fall. Same happens again but all in the opposite directions as the top yoke then vibrated to the right. So a little vibration side to side of the top yoke gets magnified by the time it reaches the new handle bars. Fact the designer fitted those top links says to me they know the joint between lower long side of the parallelogram and the short vertical upright sides is not stiff enough. If stiff enough you would not need the top links. Think if you would be willing to ride with the top links removed? Probably not because your sense might tell you it does not look sturdy enough (as sturdy as stock bars) to control the weight of a large machine through.
I think the two top links should be at an angle so they make a rigid link to the bottom of opposite sides short upright links. See the yellow diagonal. Forming two rigid triangles rather than a single flexing parallelogram. Might be some scope for adding something temporary to see if it makes any difference.
