Long vs. Standard Travel

[Dylan189]

Is it really going for long travel? I dont really notice the difference in the two other than price and of course wheel travel.

[Dylan189]

I just dont really understand the difference. You only get like 2 or 3 more inches of travel right?

[Dylan189]

Alright

[Dylan189]

Also im gonna be racing again in 4 stroke c and right now i don't have rebound adjust on my elkas is it worth getting it or should I stay with these if im riding in C class.

[Dylan189]

Well im planning on gettin a new front end and yea its not supercross.

[Dylan189]

Yea ill probobly get jb cuz i found a nice set but i havent decided on shocks i need 20 inchers for the jb a arms

[Dylan189]

But they say they are 2 3/8 inches wider then stock wont i be over 50 then.

[WB450r]

Originally posted by Dylan189
But they say they are 2 3/8 inches wider then stock wont i be over 50 then.

depends bout the wheel offset..i have +3 lt a arms with 4:1 wheel offset and at 49.5 inches..

[Scro]

Originally posted by Dylan189
I just dont really understand the difference. You only get like 2 or 3 more inches of travel right?

You can get the same amount of travel out of a ST setup as you can with a LT. The LT setup actually means that you use a longer shock, which allows for more adjustability. That's really the only thing you gain out of a LT, besides the "bling" factor and maybe a little additional ground clearance, if you were to get gullwing or maximum ground clearance a-arms.

[ALAMX37]

Originally posted by Scro
You can get the same amount of travel out of a ST setup as you can with a LT. The LT setup actually means that you use a longer shock, which allows for more adjustability. That's really the only thing you gain out of a LT, besides the "bling" factor and maybe a little additional ground clearance, if you were to get gullwing or maximum ground clearance a-arms.

If this was the case, dont you think st setups would be a little more popular. If the shock has a longer stroke, and the ball joint has more range, you get more travel than can be achieved with st travel.


Go long travel, JB makes quality arms. Any long travel shock that is 20 in will be good, may have to have them revalved if they were not built for the a-arms. I am partial to Axis and PEP. But Fox has a good product too. I owned a set of Elka's and would only run them if I have my shock builder build them. Anything straight from elka is about garbage.

[Scro]

Originally posted by ALAMX37
If the shock has a longer stroke


The shock is getting the longer stroke because the mounting point on the a-arms are farther out and/or down. If you were to take a LT setup and a ST setup with the exact same wheel travel, you would have more shaft travel with the LT setup. Because of this, the adjustment increments are going to be smaller, which normally makes for a plusher ride (as long as they are setup correctly). This is the advantage you get from LT over ST.

[Scro]

You also have to take into consideration that more travel is not always good. There are ways to make unlimited amounts of travel on the front end (protrax), but eventually you start running into the law of diminishing returns.

[ALAMX37]

Ahh I see kemosabee. One more, I know they have more down stroke, I mean my LT bike on the stand and my st bike on the stand the LT wheels hang 3-5 inches lower than the ST setup. This in turn would be more travel no?

[Scro]

Yes, that's more travel. I didn't say all ST and LT are equal. I said a ST setup can be made to have the same amount of travel. If you were to have your ST shocks modified to allow the same amount of wheel travel as the LT setup, the amount of shaft travel would still be less than the LT setup, because of the mounting point being farther out.

[Butter]

I give you credit for sitting and typing that out while thinking of it. I know exactly what your saying, and seen it myself, but I wouldn't be able to think it out and type it at the same time.

LT also allows for less than perfect setups seem perfect. They are more forgiving, but a standard travel setup can work amazingly well. I would say for local weekend races, a well setup ST setup and a great rider could be out winning their classes.

The reason ST setups aren't on alot of bikes is because for the price of a "higher end setup" you can spend a little extra, or sometimes the same amount for a LT setup. Thats a no-brainer decision right there.

The JB arms will be great. And you won't be over 50 as long as you run 4:1 offset wheel. And I run Gibson +3 with a 4:1 HiPer and its right at 49 with the 04/05 spindles.

[the predator]

i have 11+ inches of front end travel with 6" of stroke on +1 arms :D

[RobRacing]

You can get better leverage ratios with the added wheel travel on a LT setup. Plus you can run more sag in the shocks which makes it easier to soak up the small bumps. When you go over small bumps and holes your suspension actually falls into the hole and then compresses as you ride out of the bump. The more travel you have and the better leverage ratio the more plush the bump will be and you will be able to ride over it faster. If the shock never tops out then you won't feel the bump as much because your tire basically fills in the bump instead of falling into it and the climbing out. With st this is much harder to acheive because the a-arms don't travel as far down and the shocks are more straight up than angled. When you add more width to ST the ride gets harsher because the shocks are no longer on the same plane as the a-arms, thats when the better leverage ratio of LT comes into play. Basically if you are a serious racer you will never be able to ride to your full potential until you get a LT setup.