syscrusher Posted October 7, 2013 Share #1 Posted October 7, 2013 On your VR, was there a conical washer under your fork oil seal or a flat one? What year is your VR? Mine are conical, the ID rises above the OD. Bill W. sent me a picture of the fork internal from another thread that shows flat ones. http://www.venturerider.org/forkseals/george/21.jpg I ordered the part for the washer under my seal but received a flat washer instead of conical. What kind of washers did you find under your oil seal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiCarl Posted October 7, 2013 Share #2 Posted October 7, 2013 Yamaha is not showing the part superseded. Check the package, the part number should be 26H-23149-00-00. I highlighter the 9 for a reason, the washer above the seal is part number 26H-23146-00-00 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max Posted October 7, 2013 Share #3 Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) I feel your pain brother. Here are my findings replacing the washers (26H-23149) below the seal a few weeks ago. From the 'daily driven 87' forks one washer was conical (as you described) and the other one was flat. From the 'spare parts 87' forks both washers were flat. The 2 OEM replacement washers I received were flat. Till I read your previous post I thought the one found conical washer was unique to my situation. Presumed the conical washer was a factory installation or bent by previous owner during installation. Judging by the black sludge that drained out I'd lean towards factory installation. Installed the OEM flat washers and no problems at 1300 mi. Edited October 7, 2013 by Max to relect 87 & 93 uses same part no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrusher Posted October 7, 2013 Author Share #4 Posted October 7, 2013 Yamaha is not showing the part superseded. Check the package, the part number should be 26H-23149-00-00. I highlighter the 9 for a reason, the washer above the seal is part number 26H-23146-00-00 I'm aware of this. Yamaha has claimed to have shipped 45 of the 26H-23149 with no complaints except mine. The service manual depicts a part 21 both above and below the seal on page 6-32. If you look closely at the photo of the internals the ID of the one above the seal is larger than the ID of the one below. This gives the one below the seal a broader "margin". I think there are different versions of this washer without a superceeded number. The flat washer probably allows enough room for the taller aftermarket seals I've read about to fit. MiCarl, which style are you more accustomed to seeing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MiCarl Posted October 7, 2013 Share #5 Posted October 7, 2013 Ok, I'm at the shop so grabbed the service manual..... The pictures in the service manual show a plain washer (spacer). I don't see any discussion of how to orient it. I haven't been in my forks for several years so I cannot swear what they've got. Some forks use a washer that has the OD bent upward toward the seal. I assumed this is what you meant by "conical". Near as I can tell from the book that's not what the Venture is supposed to have. I wonder if some PO used a substitute he shouldn't have...... If it's got the wrong washer it could be forcing you to distort the seal to get it in. That might lead to leaking...... There is indeed a washer (seal spacer) above and below the seal. They're different part numbers though. As you can see in the photo you posted the upper washer has a larger ID to allow for the upward lip on the oil seal, thickness may also be different. Service manual could be clearer about that....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaggletooth Posted October 7, 2013 Share #6 Posted October 7, 2013 (edited) I've been following this with confused interest. Over the last few years I've had 4 sets of venture forks covering years from '84 to '87 apart and never found anything other than flat spacer washers. The smaller ID washer goes on the bottom , under the seal, and I would assume that is intended to hold the upper bushing in place in the lower leg. The larger ID spacer washer intended for the top of the seal, again, assuming its purpose is clear the lip of the seal which makes sense would not hold the upper bushing in place with the larger ID hole if used below the seal. The bushing could slip upwards and damage the seal. Now I'm just guessing these conical washers may have been the product of having someone trying to improperly remove the inner legs with great force without removing the retainer clip above the top spacer washer. It would take a lot of pressure to do that as the washers I have found are quite thick. But anything is possible. Just a thought. From my Droid wherever I may happen to be at any given moment. Edited October 8, 2013 by Snaggletooth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrusher Posted October 8, 2013 Author Share #7 Posted October 8, 2013 Max10 posting above also has one conical washer. When I looked at mine they were machine formed like they were supposed to be that way. I'm seriously thinking about using the flat one that I was sent but I am concerned that the seal would be able to move up and down slightly since the flat washer consumes much less room than the conical washer. On the left fork the conical washer doesn't easily fit into the "crown" area of the slider tube though so I wanted a replacement for it. I'd really like to hear from someone with a 1990 or newer VR since that is when they dropped the dust seal and added a cover boot. Maybe there were other changes at that time as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavidson56304 Posted October 8, 2013 Share #8 Posted October 8, 2013 I have my forks apart now on my 87 and my washers above the seal are flat. Or supposed to be anyways, I'll be ordering new ones because they are all bent out of shape for some reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marcarl Posted October 8, 2013 Share #9 Posted October 8, 2013 Interesting discussion. Never thought of it any different, always thought that both washers were the same, but have taken some out that seemed to be bent up on the ID. Did all kinds of years, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, but can't remember which had the fancy washer and which didn't. I always replaced the 'bent' washers with new ones. I assumed that the reason they were bent was because of improper disassembly by some forgetful individual who forgot to remove the spring clip first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrusher Posted October 8, 2013 Author Share #10 Posted October 8, 2013 I have my forks apart now on my 87 and my washers above the seal are flat. Or supposed to be anyways, I'll be ordering new ones because they are all bent out of shape for some reason. I suppose the ones below the seal are also flat? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrusher Posted October 8, 2013 Author Share #11 Posted October 8, 2013 Interesting discussion. Never thought of it any different, always thought that both washers were the same, but have taken some out that seemed to be bent up on the ID. Did all kinds of years, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, but can't remember which had the fancy washer and which didn't. I always replaced the 'bent' washers with new ones. I assumed that the reason they were bent was because of improper disassembly by some forgetful individual who forgot to remove the spring clip first. So you've always replaced the conical washers with a new flat one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavidson56304 Posted October 9, 2013 Share #12 Posted October 9, 2013 I suppose the ones below the seal are also flat? Yeah they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black wing Posted October 11, 2013 Share #13 Posted October 11, 2013 i just did my forks a month or two back, both top and bottom were flat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bongobobny Posted October 11, 2013 Share #14 Posted October 11, 2013 I did two MK2's but it was several years ago. I can't remember seeing any difference in the washers. I think I would have noticed if one was different... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavidson56304 Posted October 20, 2013 Share #15 Posted October 20, 2013 I've got a question about these spacers. Is there one thinner and one thicker one? If so which goes where? I can't get my seals to seat and it looks like my spacers are both thick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaggletooth Posted October 20, 2013 Share #16 Posted October 20, 2013 The thing you have to consider is the I.D. of the hole in the washer. The smaller I.D. washer goes below the seal against the upper bushing in the lower leg. Make sure that bushing is fully seated. The larger I.D. washer goes above the seal so the opening clears the lip on top of the seal. There is one brand of seals i know of , "Pyramid" that are too thick and will not seat properly under the retainer. I can't say if there is any thickness difference between the two I.D. sizes. One of each on each size should work fine.. From my Droid wherever I may happen to be at any given moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavidson56304 Posted October 20, 2013 Share #17 Posted October 20, 2013 I'm trying to install yamaha seals, the ones I removed were aftermarket. The old ones measured to be 6mm and the yamahas are 8mm. I'm fairly certain the bushing is fully seated. It was flush in the tube. I've beat the seal in with a seal driver and it will not go any further. The top of the seal is flush with the groove for the retaining ring, so, when I add the spacer on top, I can't get the retaining ring in. Does anyone know the specs for the yamaha seals? I have the right part number, but maybe I have different forks on my 87. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adavidson56304 Posted October 20, 2013 Share #18 Posted October 20, 2013 Well I think I'll try again later. The seal and spacers stacked are about 13mm and the area where it should all sit looks about the same, so it should fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pegasus1300 Posted October 20, 2013 Share #19 Posted October 20, 2013 I had the same problem with my 87 when I rebuilt my forks,the seal on the right fork would not seat. On close examination with a magnifying glass I discovered that there was enough of a deformation to keep the seal from the last little bit of travel to seal fully. A little sanding with some fine machinist's cloth and it was done.BTW I have done forks on an 83, 86,87 and all three had the conical washer on the bottom. The lip on the ID seem to fit into the seal and stop just short of the lip of the seal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
syscrusher Posted October 21, 2013 Author Share #20 Posted October 21, 2013 I had the same problem with my 87 when I rebuilt my forks,the seal on the right fork would not seat. On close examination with a magnifying glass I discovered that there was enough of a deformation to keep the seal from the last little bit of travel to seal fully. A little sanding with some fine machinist's cloth and it was done.BTW I have done forks on an 83, 86,87 and all three had the conical washer on the bottom. The lip on the ID seem to fit into the seal and stop just short of the lip of the seal. So did you sand away some material on the conical washer? I noticed on mine that the conical washer had trouble seating all the way at the bottom of the slider tube crown. It would hang part way. This is a bizarre difference with no change in part number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now