What's wrong with the FJR Windshield system

[gr8eyes]

Roadglide, why would you want cold air blowing on you in the winter time? Conversely why wouldn't you want cooling air blowing on you in the summer.

Those 2 things can't be done with the shield in the same position.

Glenn

 

[madmike2]

simple solution: Find the right shield (aftermarket) for your height and leave the damn thing in one position. Summer or winter mine remains in the same position for smooth airflow. I've tried 4 different sheilds now and have settled on the V-Stream raised about 2 inches. I'm 5'11" 193 lbs.

I'm glad it works FOR YOU. Obviously, this thread isn't directed at those owners who have found and maintain windshield nirvana. Some of us ride where climates vary a great deal. Last Saturday, when I left my home to meet "the gang" for lunch, it was 42 degrees. In the summer my local temps can reach 110 degrees. One position doesn't work when the temps vary that much and I ride year-'round, as much as possible.

It seems to me you missed one basic and obvious point by FredW:

As to the current set-up being adequate, sure for short people it most likely is. But for me at 6'2" w/32" inseam (long in torso) I have tried the following shields both with and without tuning block spacer and none allows me to run with the shield up and no head buffeting. Stock, V-stream (barn door), Rifle Sport and CalSci XtraTall. Just to be clear, I have no problems at all in the summer because I just crank the stock shield down and get my head and torso into some clean, cooling air.

I am also 6'2" with a 32" inseam, plus my Russell seat raises me 1", and since Aug '03 (on 2 different FJRs) I have not been able to find a combination that alleviates head buffet. Supposedly the NewGen eliminates this issue, but I'm not certain as I've not converesed with an owner of my dphysical dimensions.

I've tried the following windshields with various spacers and modifications:

Stock

stock w/ Laminar Lip

Oversized (AHAMAY) OEM

Oversized w/ Laminar Lip

CeeBailey +4+2 w/flip

CeeBailey +4+2 standard countour

CalSci extra tall

Right now, in the Winter, I have the CalSci mounted with Skyway spacers. IT is the only windshield that gives me a "bubble of silence". However, it is too hot in the Summer (100+ temps) so I go with the CeeBailey+4+2 w/ spacers and lower it, as does FredW, to get ambient airflow on my torso and around my helmet.

I'm also running "Hand Wings" to approximate the air management the NewGen bikes have.

__________________________________________________________________

Fred, the upper windshield arms are "free floating" and independent. Only the motor driven lower bracket has any resistance to movement because it is attached to the motor. I'm following your experimentation with great interest. The angle shaped upper bracket might be the answer to keep the windshield "in plane" and still allow it to raise toward the rider. Keep us (well, at least ME) informed as to your progress.

 

[gr8eyes]

Mike have you tried cutting about a foot off of one of those screens for summer riding. You get alot of smooth clean airflow, which is what I need in the summer, here in OK.

Glenn

 

[jestal]

One question. Do you get any water through the windshield holes? I have my GPS on a stemstand and would hate for water to pour through the holes and soak my electrics (incl. my radar detector).

I don't think the holes in the windshield drastically change the amount of water coming past in the rain.... In a short rain they might let a little more thru quicker but pretty soon water comes under the shield off the fairing surface itself anyway so it doesn't make much difference. The holes don't seem to have as "ram air" effect as I expected. Not a strong airstream thru the holes just enough to effect pressure relief due to the normal low pressure that forms behind the shield.

 

[madmike2]

Mike have you tried cutting about a foot off of one of those screens for summer riding. You get alot of smooth clean airflow, which is what I need in the summer, here in OK.
Glenn

Thanks, Glen. There are a few owners here in NorCal who have done that. I find the OEM windshield isn't enough for some of the riding I do in the Summer. I live in the Central Valley of CA and ride the delta of the Sacramento River on my commute home. There is a lot of agriculture in my area and the combination of the river and ag create one major issue: BUGS! All shapes, sizes, colors and flavors. However, they do limit the amount of sportbike trafic on my favorite twisty delta roads!

Even with the OEM 'shield I can come home bug-coated the outline of the windshield. Sometimes I think the "rice flies" are the worst...small, frail and innumerable. Within a 50 mile radius of my house the grow: rice, pears, peaches, apples, almonds, hay, alfalfa, tomatoes, walnuts, olives, sugarbeets, grapes (The Lodi wine-growing region is 10-15 miles Southwest of me, the Napa Valley is about 60 miles West-northwest).

For the Summer (hot) climate, I've found the CeeBailey +4 with a spacer to work the best. For my size the OEM lets too much hot wind hit me. The CeeBailey about 1/2 way up lets clear air flow through my helmet vents and the spacer allows fresh air to come over the nosepiece and cool my torso.

All of that "problematic" riding and I'm 90 miles from the coast and 90 miles from the Sierra peaks. It's really hard to find any good riding out here, it's my burden!?!?!?! Because of the varied terrain and climates, I search for a "balance" of wind and temperature protection vs. air flow.

I think Fred may be onto something by modifying the top windshield brackets. I've always thought the FJR's nosepiece/dash could be a bit taller--more like the BMW RT so the windshield could be more effective for those of us tho are tall. I DO realize that one bike doesn't fit all...hence the modifications. That's all part of the fun.

 

[05fjrBluedevil]

I was looking at some pictures in another thread and thinking about how frustrating the whole power windshield system on the FJR has been for so many people, including me. I think the problems are pretty much the same on both generations of the bike and can be summarized as follows:
In the lowered position everything is ducky with just about any piece of plastic you might have screwed on. It's only when you try and get some additional wind protection, like at this time of the year, that the infamous buffeting begins.

Observing how the mechanism works reveals what I believe is causing all the problems. The driven part of the windshield is the lower bracket, which remains fairly close to the front surface of the faring as it drives up and down. The upper bracket is merely a strut with 2 pivot points on each end. This results in the top of the windshield tipping forward (away from the rider) as the shield is raised.

Compare the two 2008 images below, shamelessly stolen from FJRTom in another thread. In the lowered position the shield closely parallels the leading surface of the front faring nose. But then see how far forward the top of the shield tilts as the shield is raised? The windshield becoming closer to vertical is undoubtedly what causes all the turbulent air, which results in your head getting knocked all around.

The only partial solutions I have seen to date are the skyway spacers and Rifle spacers, both of which get applied to the bottom bracket. Spacing the bottom bracket out does result in the top of the shield being less vertical at the top, but not a lot. And the shield still changes angle dramatically from top to bottom. It's just starting at a bit bigger tilt to begin with.

So, thinking about the great work being done on the mirror extensions thread, how could we redesign the upper bracket so that it allows the shield to move up but not tilt forward so much, if at all?

What I'm envisioning would be ideal is some sort of sliding affair so the shield stays at the "perfect angle", and just slides up and down in some sort of tracks.

An alternate idea would be to move the bottom pivot point of the upper strut lower (and possibly also use shorter struts) so that as the shield was raised it would still initially tilt forward some, but then would go "over center" and start to tilt back toward the rider again up at the top where all the bad buffeting occurs. I'm thinking this might be the easier path to retrofit to the existing design.

I suppose that before a design or prototype of any sort of changes to the brackets, it might make sense to see if my premise is correct, i.e. that when the shield is tipped back to the shallower attack angle that it's at when lowered now, that it works well when raised. Should figure out some way to disconnect it from the upper brackets and hold it temporarily at the shallower angle while in the raised position without damaging the windshield or the bike.

Any thoughts on this?

I saw long ago that someone actually just drilled holes in the uprights that in effect angled the shield back might try a search and it might have been on the old board.....

Mike

 

[Barabus]

You know, I brought a extra Cal Sci Large to WFO6 to see if anyone would want to try it and got NO takers. Seriously, FJR forum could collect 10 or so screen and take them to the FO's for people to try. Maybe I will do it again?

 

[brazos parker]

I saw long ago that someone actually just drilled holes in the uprights that in effect angled the shield back might try a search and it might have been on the old board.....

Could this be the article you were thinking about?

Changing the Windscreen Angle

 

[Fred W]

One question. Do you get any water through the windshield holes? I have my GPS on a stemstand and would hate for water to pour through the holes and soak my electrics (incl. my radar detector).

I don't think the holes in the windshield drastically change the amount of water coming past in the rain.... In a short rain they might let a little more thru quicker but pretty soon water comes under the shield off the fairing surface itself anyway so it doesn't make much difference. The holes don't seem to have as "ram air" effect as I expected. Not a strong airstream thru the holes just enough to effect pressure relief due to the normal low pressure that forms behind the shield.

I agree. I have a Calsci XL for Gen 1 (it has two triangular holes) and I too expected a major draft in the chest from those big holes, but it just doesn't. The air that does come through those holes seems to get drawn upward along the back side of the shield, filling the partial vacuum I suppose, then gets carried back along with the main air-stream rolling off the top.

 

[Fred W]

I saw long ago that someone actually just drilled holes in the uprights that in effect angled the shield back might try a search and it might have been on the old board.....

Could this be the article you were thinking about?

Changing the Windscreen Angle

Yes. MM2 referred to that article earlier. That info is going to come in quite handy.

 

[Fred W]

I did a little more gazing, measuring and contemplating while running the shield up and down a bunch on my bike yesterday.

Back several posts ago, markjenn intuited that the steepening angle of the windshield was intentional and that "the changing angle may actually help". Looking closely at the design I am inclined to agree, partially at least. I believe that Yamaha intended for a large increase in the angle. The increasing angle has the effect of amplifying the rather small mechanical range of the electric drive.

The drive (lower bracket) actually only moves 2 1/2", roughly parallel to the face of the front nose faring. So if sliders were used rather than the upper pivoting struts we would only be able to raise or lower the shield a total of 2 1/2". If anything, I think most riders would prefer a greater range of motion, not decreased. So, table that concept for now.

Because the upper brackets do act as struts that push the top of the shield away as it is raised, they increase the angle of the shield, which makes the top of the shield raise in the vertical direction much more than the drive range.

I measured that the upper edge of my CalSci XL shield goes from 16 7/8" in the lowered position (measured from the yamaha logo on the fork top triple tree, which is roughly straight below the top edge of the shield) to a maximum height of 21 5/8", for a total vertical range of 4 3/4", or almost twice the range of the drive. This means that if the two struts formed by the upper brackets was decreased in length, not only will the fully raised angle be different (decreased), but the height amplification will be reduced resulting in less total range.

Note that these measurements were with the rifle tuning block installed. It seems like the range of motion would be the same without the tuning block/spacer, just with a higher start and end height. I'll confirm this later, but this seems intuitively to be the case.

Conclusions:

Tuning blocks or spacers will reduce the angle of the shield without reducing the range of motion.

Shorter arms will reduce the shield angle when fully raised but will decrease the range of motion.

The latter seems to be an undesireable consequence of using that idea for a reduced angle. Perhaps the answer is in some combination of spacers or blocks for the lower (to reduce the angle) and longer upper arms for increased range?

Oh, as an aside, I priced the stock upper arms online. For 1st gens, they are part numbers 5VS-2833C-00-00 and 5VS-2833D-00-00 and are $15.50 and $9.83 from Ron Ayers. Cheap enough. I'm sure I could get them from Gary at U. Motors even cheaper still, but at this point I'm not sure I'll be needing them for cutting down. I might want to try some longer ones. Or how about some extend-able struts? Hmmm...

 

[Bull]

Hi Fred

For what it's worth - here are a few notes about my windscreen experiences....

At 6' 2" I too sit rather tall in the saddle - so the stock screen on my 06 is good in summer at low to medium, but gets a bit 'slappy' when raised to full height. Skyways's spacers improve the stocker, but even that improvement can only take me so far.

So in the winter time (or on tours) I put on the Rifle +6 +6. He's a big bugger, but with the rifle tuning blocks, I get a completely silent ride when the screen is 75% up to max. The +6 +6 doesn't look as good on the bike as the much sleeker stocker, but man he does the job if you're looking for a quiet ride. I've also noticed some feedback through the bars when approaching higher speeds with the +6 +6, but then again, I usually just ride with the Rifle during the winter months when the conditions here in BC don't really lend themselves to (ahem) more spirited riding.

I tried the Big Rifle with Skyway's spacers - but the rifle blocks did a much better job for me. I'll still use Skyway's spacers for the stocker though because they still do a really good job with the stock screen. BTW - if anyone else is wondering about doing this, you have to drill new holes through the rifle so they match up with the bike's mounting points. I was disappointed with the lack of result so I wouldn't recommend you try it.

Fred - I like how you're thinking. I don't think you need a wind tunnel to test out ideas either - just build it on the bike then ride it on the highway (that's windtunnel enough for me). I am particularly interested to see if you can find the right shaped arm for the upper pivot so that the screen angle doesn't seem to start off nice, then gets too vertical as it rises. How can you improve this so that it maintains the perfect angle as it rises (whatever 'perfect' might mean in this sense will become clearer through the experimental phase).

Keep on experimenting Fred!

thanks for your tinkering and sharing your findings - cheers, Bull

 

[Howardrg]

In 2004 when I picked up my new FJR, I noticed two things. The first was the front end "clunk" and the other was the turbulence and wind pressure on my back.

The first was easy as it was a matter of tightening the steering head bearings, the second had me worried. The turbulence, me and the Yamaha were not going to stay friends if this could not be rectified. [i am 6'1" with 32" inseam]

I had read about the tuning block, bigger/higher screens, but was not an option as I am in South Africa. So, what to do ?

The stock screen in it's upright position is almost vertical. There is no way that the wind is going to be defected upwards.

I figured if I could increase the angle of deflection, I would cause the turbulence to be further back [from me and my pillion]

The amount of angle would be hit and miss if I could not steadily increase and try each adjustment, so I made up sets of spacers ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm.

I started with 5 mm and worked up to 15. For me, my height, my personal preference, I found that 12 mm was on the nail.

No turbulence at any speed or wind direction. [less wind resistance = better fuel consumption]

There is nothing wrong with the stock screen for some folks, for others it sucks. Those of you that have fitted spacers of sorts and are still not 100 % happy, try various sizes until you get it right for you

Hope this helps

Howard

 

[Fred W]

In 2004 when I picked up my new FJR, I noticed two things. The first was the front end "clunk" and the other was the turbulence and wind pressure on my back.The first was easy as it was a matter of tightening the steering head bearings, the second had me worried. The turbulence, me and the Yamaha were not going to stay friends if this could not be rectified. [i am 6'1" with 32" inseam]

I had read about the tuning block, bigger/higher screens, but was not an option as I am in South Africa. So, what to do ?

The stock screen in it's upright position is almost vertical. There is no way that the wind is going to be defected upwards.

I figured if I could increase the angle of deflection, I would cause the turbulence to be further back [from me and my pillion]

The amount of angle would be hit and miss if I could not steadily increase and try each adjustment, so I made up sets of spacers ranging from 5 mm to 20 mm.

I started with 5 mm and worked up to 15. For me, my height, my personal preference, I found that 12 mm was on the nail.

No turbulence at any speed or wind direction. [less wind resistance = better fuel consumption]

There is nothing wrong with the stock screen for some folks, for others it sucks. Those of you that have fitted spacers of sorts and are still not 100 % happy, try various sizes until you get it right for you

Hope this helps

Howard

Thanks Howard. I actually have done a similar thing over time, using home made plastic spacers, but I don't think I was as careful and methodical as you were by the sounds of it. I tried 3 different sized spacers, 3/8", 1/2" and then I jumped up to 1" when I had the hu-ge-moungous Vstream on there. It was clear that I was getting different turbulence patterns at each increment, but I never found complete satisfaction.

Afterward I settled on a set of Rifle tuning block spacers that are on there now because they were the most solid, and allowed the shield to wiggle around the least amount while underway.

For those who have not played the spacer game before, it's kind of PITA. You have to remove your shield and remove the 2 lower screws that hold the W bracket to the lower drive bracket every time you want to swap out spacers.

So maybe what's needed here is some sort of a variable spacer rig for the lower bracket so that one could easily "dial in" their custom spacer angle.

The challenge I foresee would be to make it sturdy enough, considering the amount of force that a shield puts on those brackets, especially the larger after market add-ons. Some of the other guys on the forum have had their home-brewed spacer screws break off in-flight, which would be a rather scary thing at highway speeds.

 

[Howardrg]

The trial and error was using the stock screen

I was fortunate at the time to have stainless steel washers made.

There is no [additional] flex even flat out into or with side wind.

Been using for the past 30,000 Kms

Try this link [copy and paste]

https://www.villagephotos.com/viewpubimage....9&selected=

Howard

You are welcome to come and ride my bike to see for yourself

 

[Fred W]

The trial and error was using the stock screenI was fortunate at the time to have stainless steel washers made.

There is no [additional] flex even flat out into or with side wind.

Been using for the past 30,000 Kms

Try this link [copy and paste]

https://www.villagephotos.com/viewpubimage....9&selected=

Those spacers look quite spiffy. Far better than the plastic ones that I played with.

However, one thing that I noticed about the Rifle tuning block is that, in addition to the requisite spacing, the block also offsets the holes upward just a bit, and also slightly changes the angle of the brackets. I'm thinking this was intentional and may be part of the reason that the blocks seem to result in a very solid mounting. You can see these features in the side view of the rifle tuning block below:

The two allen head bolts in the picture are screwed into the drive bracket and then the stock screws are used to attach the W bracket to the tuning block. This block design may make a better starting point for some sort of articulating spacer so that one could increment the spacing and maybe also increment the amount of vertical rise (the offset of the holes left-right in the picture) and a change in the angle if required (not sure it is).

[Thinking out loud]

What if the tuning block above were made from two pieces. A bottom piece and an angled piece that could slide up/down.

Too much additional vertical rise will likely result in the upper arms running out of range. That's when the L shaped arms may come into play.

[/Thinking out loud]

You are welcome to come and ride my bike to see for yourself

Thanks. I'll swing by next time I'm in South Africa...

 

[Jagermeister]

Sheesh! Why is it I have to read everything an Engineer posts TWICE? :huh:

Seriously, I'm following this with great interest. Loved the results produced by the +5 Rifle w/ blocks on my 07. What I didn't love was the fuglyness of it. Hopefully, you scientist types come up with a better solution, which I can then shamelessly adopt!

 

[Knifemaker]

I think part of the problem here is that we are at the mercy of the aftermarket designers. All the replacement screens are , more or less, an exaggeration of the stock design. Only the V-Stream seems to have new thinking put into it.

The easiest way to achive a shallower angle of attack for the windscreen , when raised fully up, is to have that formed into the windsceen to begin with. Look at the old cafe fairings with their "bubble shields"- the top of the windscreens were curved almost straight back.

If you had a windscreen that had alot more curve like that to begin with, when it is raised up and tipped forward (like the FJR mechinism does) you would still have a rather pronounced slant to the rear, as oppossed to the more upright stance of a flatter screen.

Look at the side view photos. The sheild has a bit of a curve front to back (or bottom to top) but is still fairly straight. Most of the curve is side to side. Picture it with a screen that curves back from the mounts at a sharper radius. Now when the shield gets raised, the very front part will get a bit vertical, but the top 1/2 or so will still be curved back.

So what we need is someone to make a screen that simply has more of a front to rear curve, and is tall enough when extended to cover those 6 foot + riders.

KM

 

[Fred W]

I think part of the problem here is that we are at the mercy of the aftermarket designers. All the replacement screens are , more or less, an exaggeration of the stock design. Only the V-Stream seems to have new thinking put into it.The easiest way to achive a shallower angle of attack for the windscreen , when raised fully up, is to have that formed into the windsceen to begin with. Look at the old cafe fairings with their "bubble shields"- the top of the windscreens were curved almost straight back.

If you had a windscreen that had alot more curve like that to begin with, when it is raised up and tipped forward (like the FJR mechinism does) you would still have a rather pronounced slant to the rear, as oppossed to the more upright stance of a flatter screen.

Look at the side view photos. The sheild has a bit of a curve front to back (or bottom to top) but is still fairly straight. Most of the curve is side to side. Picture it with a screen that curves back from the mounts at a sharper radius. Now when the shield gets raised, the very front part will get a bit vertical, but the top 1/2 or so will still be curved back.

So what we need is someone to make a screen that simply has more of a front to rear curve, and is tall enough when extended to cover those 6 foot + riders.

KM

Those are some very good thoughts. You may not be aware, but the CalSci screens, which are among the biggest pieces of plastic for the FJR, do not have any curvature in that dimension (top to bottom) only the normal side to side concave curve. Also, as I remember it, neither did the Vstream, but I don't have one to look at anymore to verify.

I wonder how weird / bad / ugly an accentuated top to bottom curved shield would look? Maybe that's why none of the aftermarket shield guys have gone that route yet?

 

[Knifemaker]

I wonder how weird / bad / ugly an accentuated top to bottom curved shield would look? Maybe that's why none of the aftermarket shield guys have gone that route yet?

I think part of it is cost. It is easy to "bend" a sheet of plastic one way, but producing one that curves heavily in both directions might just be more difficult. I also suspect it is hard to maintain an "opticaly correct" shield that is more spherical.

I would guess that most makers simply rely on computer design drawings and do very little , if any, windtunnel testing on the actual model.

But I think I would willing pay more for windscreen if it preformed far above the others on the market.

If the shield was not too radicaly curved, "ugly" would be subjective. Many don't like the looks of the V-Stream, but many say it works well.