89 frame do i need +1 forward ?

[norcalduner]

i am very confused and already did a search . also most aftermarket companies mostly make +1 forward in both standard and long travel setups.

so do i need a +1 forward setup since my frame is an 89. my goal is to go wider most likely a +2 but unable to get big name makers that produce a +2+0 setup .

pls help.

[beerock]

you can do either depends on what you want to do

the +1 will move the weight of the bike forward a bit making it harder to wheelie but more stable

[more tea vicar]

Lonestar still make standard travel +2" and LT +3 for the 250R

[norcalduner]

hey beerock,
i will use it primarily for mx and occassional flat track racing. so will
this make the quad handle differently than if i get the ones that are not +1 forward. based on the search i did here, the 88-89 geometry is best for the type of riding i do so if i get +1, can you give me an idea on how it will handle e.g. on jumps, coming into turns, wide open straightways ?
thanks,
joey

[beerock]

well, I can pretty much say i probably have one of the most unique setups for a R in terms of width/length

my front end is a +3+0 pro trax
most have +3+1 and narrow frames

I have a Laeger fliptop stock geom frame which makes the front end wider then a narrow pro front end laeger my front end is 52 wide on the bottom of the tire and about 47 on top of the tire due to my camber setup. a narrow frame is around 49" wide on bottom of tire, 47ish on top.

my rear end has a 1 3/4" shorter swingarm compared to a 86 swinger and 3/4" shorter then a 88 swinger. and measures 50-51ish wide

by shortening the front and rear my bike is 1 3/4" shorter then a 88 swingarm +1 front end which most all R's are and 2 3/4" shorter then a 86 setup.

being wider/shorter then most it translates into a fast turning easily flickable R the shorter swingarm allow you to tackle the whoops faster the wider front end also complements this

I know it will be pretty hard to find a 3/4inch swinger and a -arms that are not +1

it sounds like for what you would be doing the setup i have would work well

if you cant go that route , the 88 swinger is fine with a +3+1 front end but it will not turn in as fast and for TT thats an important thing, alot of people have short swingers just for tt, like -3"

i hope this helps you get an idea of what you want.

[Rich250RRacer]

Originally posted by norcalduner
i am very confused and already did a search . also most aftermarket companies mostly make +1 forward in both standard and long travel setups.

so do i need a +1 forward setup since my frame is an 89. my goal is to go wider most likely a +2 but unable to get big name makers that produce a +2+0 setup .

pls help.

Beerock's right with all his info. Keep this in mind, all the chassis' are the same when it comes to mounting location of a-arms. The mounts were NOT moved forward on 88-89 models. If possible, take a measurement from the center of the swingarm bolt to the a-arm mounts on an 86-87 and an 88-89 chassis. They are the same.

[beak7707]

So did the 88-89's just have a -1 swinger? I always thought the whole geo was moved faorward an inch. Swinger 1 inch shorter, a-arms up 1 inch forward. I had a -1 houser swingarm and houser +1 forward a-arms on my 87 250r and really like the geo, but I thought it was the same as a stock 88-89. Thats what houser told me it would be anyways.

[beerock]

Originally posted by beak7707
So did the 88-89's just have a -1 swinger? I always thought the whole geo was moved faorward an inch. Swinger 1 inch shorter, a-arms up 1 inch forward. I had a -1 houser swingarm and houser +1 forward a-arms on my 87 250r and really like the geo, but I thought it was the same as a stock 88-89. Thats what houser told me it would be anyways.

yes -1 if you had a 86-87

see the 86 swing arm is +1 comarped to an 88-89 some people use the 86-87 for the length to keep the front end down

they also use the 86-87 to shorten or l them for TT or lengthen them for draggin since they are made of steel the 88-89 oem swingers are aluminum and you dont want to really play with it.

i know its kind of complicated because they changed the length and the front a-arms as well so it just throws something else into the mix to make it harder to figure it out.

like i said it all depends on what you want to do.

[matt250r21]

I have both +3 +0, and +3 +1 Laegers pro trax front ends, for MX I like the +3 +0 setup in every situation over the +1 forward arms. The bike just fells more responsive to me everywhere. The +1's are suppose to help with traction and the longer wheelbase should make it more stable in the rough stuff. I think all the pros back in the day ran the +1 forward setup and the wide (stock) lower frame rails (where the arms mount to the frame). I think it all boils down to personal preferance.

[norcalduner]

thanks guys for all your input :D