have to settle a debate

[extremeblastr]

do long travel shocks have more travel then standard travel?

through simple logic i believe they do but our friend coryatver is adamant about them being a complete waste of money...which by the way i see as proof of him never having ridden on a long travel bike

lol, yeah hes going on and on about us being brainwashed.

[coryatver]

I never said they are a waste of money. Infact most of the time Long shocks will work better than standard becuase they are easier to set up becuase the shock is longer.

Long travel means longer shock. You don't get any more travel. The longer shock smooths out the spring rates and gives a different leverage ratio but it is not really needed if you get standard shocks set up correctly they work just as good.

The aftermarket company's should call it long shock not long travel. But it sounds better and gets people to spend the extra $400 they cost. Where as if these companies actually spent time working on std travel shocks as they do long travel they could make them work just as good. But then you wouldn't want to pay $400 more for the shocks and you wouldn't even have to buy a-arms unless you wanted to make it wider. Meaning less profits for them.

If long travel actually had more travel, then your frame would smash the ground lol not a good thing

[extremeblastr]

actually it wouldn't, which is why people don't bottom out using long travel shocks....


lets just look at this from a common sense point of view

standard travel vs long travel...hmmm sounds like we add something when we went from standard to LONG

[hypersnyper6947]

Originally posted by F-16Guy
I wouldn't say I'm an expert by any stretch, but here's my $.02:

Std vs. LT -- The only difference, at least in theory, between the two is the lower shock mount location. LT arms move the mounts out toward the spindle, which increases the distance the shock shaft has to travel for a given suspension movement, which results in faster shaft speed. Making the piston move faster through the oil should make the shock more sensitive to adjustments, therefore, more tuneable. I think people are starting to realize that LT doesn't necessarily = better, especially depending on your skill level. If you can't ride to the machine's potential, you probably won't realize the gains.


When F-16guy explained it like this it helped me understand the difference, there is more travel but that is in the shock it self not actually the wheel traveling more.

[SRH]

Originally posted by coryatver
I never said they are a waste of money. Infact most of the time Long shocks will work better than standard becuase they are easier to set up becuase the shock is longer.

Long travel means longer shock. You don't get any more travel. The longer shock smooths out the spring rates and gives a different leverage ratio but it is not really needed if you get standard shocks set up correctly they work just as good.

The aftermarket company's should call it long shock not long travel. But it sounds better and gets people to spend the extra $400 they cost. Where as if these companies actually spent time working on std travel shocks as they do long travel they could make them work just as good. But then you wouldn't want to pay $400 more for the shocks and you wouldn't even have to buy a-arms unless you wanted to make it wider. Meaning less profits for them.

If long travel actually had more travel, then your frame would smash the ground lol not a good thing

this is true, the travel has more to do with the a arm than anything, the wheel can only travel as far as the a arm /spindle combo allows

for some reason the valving works better on a longer shock body im not sure why

you can tune any std travel shock to perform as well as any long travel setup if you got a good shock guy and the time to dial them in

i think most people dont realize if you get elka shocks there alll valved the same with different springs , if you took your oem shock on some of the new 450s and had them built there is no reason if its done correctly that the shock should handle any differently than a aftermarket one

i had a set of std travel laegers arms on my yfz and they actually dropped out further than my buddies long travel gibsons , so essentially the gibson had a longer shock but not as much wheel travel as my std travel front end

[SRH]

Originally posted by hypersnyper6947
When F-16guy explained it like this it helped me understand the difference, there is more travel but that is in the shock it self not actually the wheel traveling more.

that explains things dead on

i always found it funny these guys who buy the big money shocks with 14 different knobs and stuff....goodluck youd have to spend your life doing setups to know how to dial them, compression and rebound is all the average racer can handle and needs to handle

before id buy something id think to myself, could doug gust whoop my *** without this part if i had it? haha

its funny to me the guys that always complain about lacking motor....there not lacking motor there lacking proper suspension setup and the hp is a patch on there riding ability, think about it, if your suspension is dialed you carry more momentum thus you rely less on your engine

[SRH]

Originally posted by extremeblastr
actually it wouldn't, which is why people don't bottom out using long travel shocks....


lets just look at this from a common sense point of view

standard travel vs long travel...hmmm sounds like we add something when we went from standard to LONG


actually if your suspension is properly setup it should be bottoming ,not harshly but you should be using your full range of suspension travel

[extremeblastr]

yeah but he is saying that by adding travel you will immediately bottom out to the frame. i understand that the wheel and whatnot doesn't travel more but the shock does have more travel which is what allows it to soak up the harder hits better. but as you said, the perfect setup for a track should have you bottoming out (not harshly) on the bigger jumps of the track

[coryatver]

your saying the quad has more travel with long travel shocks. meaning it travels up and down farther. But if it did that your frame would case. your tires would rip your front fenders off if you have them, and so on. I don't know any other way to say it the shocks are longer. They don't have any more travel! I am not arguing that long travel shocks are great shocks and if you buy a long travel setup it will probley work better than buying some standard shocks from the same company and throwing them on. But if you know somebody that is good with shocks they can make a std shock work just as good.

[extremeblastr]

no, the shocks do have more travel. but they do not allow the wheel to move up farther because of the relocated mounting point.

[lonnie1977]

Pro Series Black Widow
3 & 4-Way Adjustable -w- TRS Stadium

This is a no pre-load version of the new Pro Series Black Widow Piggyback shocks designed to be set lower for maximum cornering. The regular Black Widow is deigned to sit low, but the Stadium is lower and is intended for closed course MX and Stadium. They are fitted with the low or high and low speed compression adjustments (depending on application), low speed rebound adjustment, large-capacity oversized reservoirs, massive 5/8-inch induction-hardened high tensile chromed alloy shafts, four-stage compression damping and Teflon fabric spherical bearing eyes. The damper tubes are treated with an advanced mil-spec coating that dissipates heat better than bare metal and Works' exclusive computer-generated check-ball and orfice damping design that is decades ahead of traditional deflective shim technology from the 1930's - the design used by most other shock manufacturers.

Available for TRX250R, TRX400EX, TRX450R, LTZ/KFX/DVX400, KFX700, YFZ450, Raptor 660, and Bombardier DS650. Long travel versions are available for Lonestar, Roll, and Houser arms. The 450R is also available in a 12-inch travel version that is used with the stock arms

Taken from works site. some how they get more travel out of the 450R stock arms.

Also you cant use long travel shocks with out aftermarket arms. Whick are useally a + something arm moving the wheel farther out from the frame. With the wheel being farther out from the frame you will naturally get more travel up and down in the wheel.

[<DRS>GPF]

not having seen/read the original discussion when the statement was made..

perhaps if the statement were made in a different context..
i could accept a statement about the likely hood of "more likely to bottom out a quad" when using a set of shocks primarily designed for use on an MX track for woods/trail riding..

noting that its my understanding(pleasantly correct me if im "ill informed") that long travel shocks are designed primarily for use on an MX track, lowering the ride height of the quad to add more stability.
of course, it could also be that a quad with lt shocks, having been set up for MX racing, also typically has smaller diameter tires, thus lower the ride height, instead of "sag" from the shocks being the primary reason for the lowered height overall.

help me here guys, am i over thinking this?? (all of the above? none of the above?.. im FOS and i should just go away?)
would you use a lt shock for XC or trail riding?

Originally posted by <DRS>GPF
not having seen/read the original discussion when the statement was made..

perhaps if the statement were made in a different context..
i could accept a statement about the likely hood of "more likely to bottom out a quad" when using a set of shocks primarily designed for use on an MX track for woods/trail riding..

noting that its my understanding(pleasantly correct me if im "ill informed") that long travel shocks are designed primarily for use on an MX track, lowering the ride height of the quad to add more stability.
of course, it could also be that a quad with lt shocks, having been set up for MX racing, also typically has smaller diameter tires, thus lower the ride height, instead of "sag" from the shocks being the primary reason for the lowered height overall.

help me here guys, am i over thinking this?? (all of the above? none of the above?.. im FOS and i should just go away?)
would you use a lt shock for XC or trail riding?

basically coryatver said that "long travel shocks, do NOT increase the amount of travel the wheel travels up and down. For example, the 400ex stock has 9.1 inches of wheel travel. But our argument is that it in fact DOES increase wheel travel.

He claims the long travel is no different other then the longer shock is easier to set up and valve.

He says if it WAS longer wheel travel, the frame would smash the ground.

[BLU82]

When you jump the long travel allows your wheels to move farther down, then when you land there is in fact more travel to soak up the landing. Or maybe I just made that up, I don't really know.

[extremeblastr]

Originally posted by BLU82
When you jump the long travel allows your wheels to move farther down, then when you land there is in fact more travel to soak up the landing. Or maybe I just made that up, I don't really know.


bingoooooo thank you ed

[<DRS>GPF]

Originally posted by DMC-4OOEX
basically coryatver said that "long travel shocks, do NOT increase the amount of travel the wheel travels up and down. For example, the 400ex stock has 9.1 inches of wheel travel. But our argument is that it in fact DOES increase wheel travel.

He claims the long travel is no different other then the longer shock is easier to set up and valve.

He says if it WAS longer wheel travel, the frame would smash the ground.

ahh.. i see and agree with your assessment.

poor response from something with additional length could make for some rough landings or worse yet, hitting a set of "whoops". all the extra $$ likely wont save you, if not tuned to your skill.
though i suppose that would be true of any shock..



Originally posted by BLU82
When you jump the long travel allows your wheels to move farther down, then when you land there is in fact more travel to soak up the landing. Or maybe I just made that up, I don't really know.

sounds logical..

with the wheels on the ground sooner and more often, the ability to steer while the quad is elevated beyond normal ride height would also be a bonus..

[SRH]

Originally posted by BLU82
When you jump the long travel allows your wheels to move farther down, then when you land there is in fact more travel to soak up the landing. Or maybe I just made that up, I don't really know.

UNTRUE

a arms effect the wheel travel like i said my std laegers had more travel than a gibson lt setup, the gibson were considered long travel but only really had a longer shock

you can only use so much wheel travel before your frame hits, you can gain some travel with std travel and long travel but unless your ride height itself is taller the shock isnt going to dampen anything you gain travel wise thats before where it sits at its ride height

[MX MaNiAc 06]

I kinda think it's easier to frame out with long travel. I had never hit frame with my stock shocks or old 400ex with std travel elkas. My buddy's long travel hit frame on hard impacts too and he had never hit frame with standard travel. Not positive about theory i just thought it made sense.

I do not agree with standard shocks being better than long travel if set up correctly. Yes, maybe if the long travel shocks aren't dead on compared to someone who had perfectly dialed std travel. But if someone was to get long travel suspension and not set it up correctly they're out of their g*d damn element. Personally I cannot dial the ride height and rebound. But I had a guy that knows what he's doing help me out and it made them 5x smoother.

There is definately a huge improvement with long travel shocks compared to standard travel.. in my opinion.

[extremeblastr]

your going the wrong way, what blu is saying is that by having the "long travel" shock when you leave the ground it allows your wheels to sag farther towards the ground and with the compression rate set properly allows the shock to soak up more of the impact, not that it allows everything to travel farther in the upwards arc

[SRH]

Originally posted by extremeblastr
your going the wrong way, what blu is saying is that by having the "long travel" shock when you leave the ground it allows your wheels to sag farther towards the ground and with the compression rate set properly allows the shock to soak up more of the impact, not that it allows everything to travel farther in the upwards arc

no no you guys are missing the point, what were saying is a properly setup std travel shock should perform no differently than a properly setup long travel shock

here is the problem

NO ONE SETS UP THERE SHOCKS or at least the majority, and it is easier to setup a long travel shock than a std travel so there is a better shot at getting the long travel setup right than the std travel for joe shmo thus the long travel seems to out perform std travel

no one is going the wrong way...your not grasping what im saying, your shock can only drop out as far as the a arm allows i dont care if your shock is capable of extending out 18 ft, its only going to rebound or compress as far as the a arm and spindle will allow

now, yes some std and long travel setups will drop out further than stock but there is alot of long travel setups out there that drop out no further than a std travel laegers or houser setup

so say your shocks could drop out 3 ft (not likely) but sitting on the ground 2 ft of that travel is compressed just weight of the quad uses 2 ft of travel...what sort of advantage are you gaining by the front wheels basically moving freely up and down 2 ft...not much...so yes with a aftermarket front end it is possible to gain a few inches of travel but you dont necessarily have to go with a long travel front end to gain it....

the real benefit is how the shock performs with the added length is in the valving , the only gain i could see in actually have more travel is with a much higher ride height, then you actually gain more useable suspension stroke, other wise you only have the travel from your ride height to full compression basically yes they do drop out some but the spring isnt very apparent when there dropped beyond ride height setting

[fastredrider44]

Good arguements from both sides, but the way I see it, when your wheels are off the ground, the tires do hang lower with LT than Std travel. As long as the wheels are on the ground, there shouldn't be any difference.

Let's think about the rear end. you take a bone stock bike, and you pick the rear end up with the grab bar. You might lift 2 inches at the most before the tires come off the ground. Then you walk over to a LT bike that is sitting, and you have to pick the thing up nearly a 6 inches to get the tires off the ground. Thus, Long travel Does have more travel, because you know it will squat further than stock as well.

Now as far as which is better, there is no doubt that LT is easier to setup. For STD travel to work as well as LT, It has to be spot on.

[coryatver]

For a certain quad there is a correct amount of travel that will make it handle the best. You do not want to much up travel or down travel. To much up travel, your frame hits the ground. To much down travel and your quad will handle really bad with all the weight transfer.

As for saying long travel ride height is lower than running stock shocks( as the guy posted above says they sag more) people usually associate it with long shocks becuase they are replacing stock shocks that don't have any sag. With std length shocks you can also set the ride height lower, and you can achieve any ride height you can with long shocks.

So if your saying long travel is sagging so much more than a standard setup that will give you a lot of down travel, But if that is true you will not have enough up travel.

If you are STILL saying this isn't true, If it is truly sagging a lot(which gives you a lot of down travel) and you still swear you still have a lot of up travel your saying your frame will case before you shocks ever bottom out.

[SRH]

your travel is only really ride height to full compression......sag wont even dampen the compression of the weight of the quad until it reaches the point in the stroke where it sits for its ride height

[F-16Guy]

The amount of wheel travel is determined by the physical limitations of the a-arms, spindles, and ball joints. You can use any given length of shock to acheive a certain amount of travel based on it's mounting points.

Long travel a-arms do not, by virtue of using a longer shock, have more or less travel than ST arms. All shock discussion aside, aftermarket arm companies know that if you increase physical arm travel, you get a more capable set-up. The fact that aftermarket arms have more travel than factory arms is just a result of a demand for more wheel travel, and it has little to do with what shocks are used.

Now, back to shocks. LT arms use longer shocks because the lower mount point is moved out toward the spindle, which causes the shaft to move more with a given suspension movement vs. a ST arm/shock combo. Making the shaft move more for a given amount of wheel travel means that the shaft has to move faster to cover the same distance, hence increased shaft speed. When the piston is moving faster through the fluid, it becomes more sensitive to valving and clicker changes, and therefore, more tuneable (in theory).

[ridered11]

http://www.scottandbiccy.com/albums/funny/InternetFight.jpg

[procircuit406ex]

If you can find a good shock builder like Laz or Santo, and send them your STANDARD travel shocks and tell them what your doing, it WILL ride just as good as long travel. The STANDARD travel HLS Elites I ride now ride better than half of the long travel junk out there. I liked my setup over one of Craig Reeds ARSfx/Ohlins front ends. The only reason people like long travel shocks is for one they think it makes them faster or better for some reason:huh and a shock builder can tune the shock more precisely

[400exrider707]

I wouldn't call this an internet fight. There are some people who are telling others what is right, and then there are some people who are just not getting it.

F-16guy and SRH.... listen to them and keep reading the posts they have already.

LT shocks are useless for 90% of the people who use them, because they dont know how to tune shocks. LT is a selling gimmick. An aftermarket LT setup, vs. and aftermarket ST setup, you shouldn't find any difference in actual WHEEL TRAVEL. Shock travel is what you are gaining. Supposedly LT shocks are able to be more fine tuned. If you dont know how to properly setup a ST shock, there is no point spending more money on a LT setup.

LT suspension is a selling point!

It should be called Long Shock.