+2 or +3 A-arms for MX/Desert???

[socal]

I purchased a set of +2 long travel arms and have Hiper 4-1 offset wheels.This will put me at only 46" wide up front,compared to about 49" out back.Will I have better handling results with this setup or should I run a 3-2 wheel and will be at 48"wide.The MX standard is 50",that would require me selling the +2 arms and going with +3s and 3-2 wheels.What is the idea setup?Other than MX,I will also be riding desert,wider jeep type trails and fire roads.

[danhung11]

If I were you, I would take the cheaper route and mount some MX tires to some 3:2 rims of your choice and leave your 4:1 Hipers for some good XC tires. That way, you can narrow her up for the tighter stuff and still use it as a MX bike, once in a while. Your setup is the exact same setup I have on my Green/Blue Aren's bike. Put some nice shocks on and you will be loving it, handles great!

The only different is yours is a 86-87 setup, the Arens's are 88-89 platform frames.

[DnB_racing]

running the 3-2 offset will give a little more feedback , depending on the trails it might not matter,but if your riding on rough rutted trails you would be better off with the 4-1, it kinda depends on what type of conditions your riding on,

but if your looking to get 48" I personally would do it with wider a-arms and keep the 4-1 offset, but all I ride is R's (roots, rocks, rough and ruts)lol

[hasbeenttduner]

If possible run the 4x1's with wider arms. Being from the west coast maybe someone that rides in the trees back east has a set wider then yours that they would swap you with.

[socal]

Coming from the 4 bangers,everyyhing used on them is a +2 for MX because the quad comes from the factory a bit wider than the R,thats what threw me off!Im still questioning wheather to use them or not!Any more feedback would help...

[4x4 AG]

I was going through the same thing some months ago. But i am running nothing but MX and playing. So I wanted to keep 4:1 wheels and go with the +3 arms. Doing that, I will be right at 49" in the front and about the same in the rear.

Only downside to that set-up, is that if i want to run hare scrambles or woods, i am probably too wide and would need a different set-up for that. I chose to not worry about that, i just wanted the best MX set-up.

[OutlawATV4]

Just a thought, but if you run +3 with a 3-2 offset that will most likely put you over the legal limit of 50" for mx. I have both a 450R and 250R. My 450R is set up with a +3 with 4-1 offset to keep me right at the 50" setup and I measured it myself with the rear axle completely extended. I am running a stock frame on my 250R so that means I will run the +3wide+1 forward a-arms w/ 4-1 offset front wheels again with the rear axle fully extended. I had an 86 250R back like 8 years ago with Laeger +2+1 a-arms with 3-2 offset rims and it was like 2 inches short of 50", and I only ran the axle at +3 not +4 like I wanted to because it would have been too wide in the rear. My point being is that regretted setting up my 86 250R w/ a +2 front end and I didn't like it. I should have went with the +3+1 up front. However I want my bikes setup strictly for mx so that is why I prefer them wider. This is just a thought for ya.

[socal]

Thanks,I am actually working on getting +4 arms from Lonestar and running my 4/1 Hipers with Z400 or LTR450 spindles,that would put me right at 50".I was told that is the best 250R MX setup....

[Grande Huevos]

my r has +3 and is sitting at 50in which handles awesome! its great for the track and kills in the sand!!! u can take some tight corners at good speeds and not worry about it its like a caddy. i ride mine on trails too and dont usually have any problems fitting anywhere, i guess it would depend on the park u go to or if they r homade trails so u can make the trails fit ur bike :) its going to differ from one rider to the next but i personally love this setup!

[hasbeenttduner]

I think you are going in the right direction for your needs. Maybe you could sell your +2 to someone here in the forums.

[K-Dub]

I run Roll LoboII +3s with 450R spindles, hub, rotors, and brakes. At ride height I'm 49 3/4", arms level 51 1/2" depending on my - camber setting. I was told along time ago by a pro you have to fit through the gauge at ride height not at arms level, so to sit your width up for ride height fitting through the gauge.

[OutlawATV4]

Yea running +4 is cool too. Just to let you know there isn't really a "best" setup. It's what the rider prefers to use based on what their using the bike for. Also, to give you a little insight incase you may not be aware, the reason they designed +4 a-arms was due to the use of aftermarket companies making narrow frames, meaning the frame is narrower where the A-arms bolt up to. So riders would use the +4 setup with the narrow frames not with standard geometry frames. Good reason being is that going with a +4 front end used on a standard frame would make your front end wider then your rear axle. You want the rear to be a little wider or the same width as the front for handling purposes. I just wanted you to be aware of all the info to help you make the best decision possible before spending a lot of money on aftermarket parts. Trust me, you want to do it right the first time around. Good luck to ya.

[DnB_racing]

Originally posted by OutlawATV4
You want the rear to be a little wider or the same width as the front for handling purposes. yes it should!! but I damaged my rear axle , and didnt have money to replace , so I put my stocker back in, its 2 inches less then the front and it handles like its on rails..
I really dont get it? I thought it would be horrible, but I actually like it better on my current setup .. this is on my 450

Im puzzled by this to!!

[OutlawATV4]

For handling purposes I meant more so for like high speed cornering so the bike can be more stable from that perspecitve.

[DnB_racing]

Originally posted by OutlawATV4
For handling purposes I meant more so for like high speed cornering so the bike can be more stable from that perspecitve. ya I know , but it wasn't tipy and it had just the right amount of slide..I was really surprised, and I know its not recommended and Im sure that lap times would probably be less, but as far as pit riding i actually liked it better

im not telling anyone to setup like this, but if needed to run with stock size axle its not as bad as you would think it would be

[D Bergstrom]

Originally posted by OutlawATV4
You want the rear to be a little wider or the same width as the front for handling purposes.

I have been told and found myself the opposite of this. You want the front to be a little wider then the rear. A wider rear can cause the quad to push in the corners. Back when I built my first 450R I just had the axle spacers placed to provide the max width, never checked how wide the quad actually was. Never thought the quad cornered great, but was not to bad. I was then told about the rear being narrower, so I measured mine and the rear was almost 1" wider overall then the front. Swapped spacers around so the rear was narrower and it was a night and day difference, quad cornered so much better. Currently my 450R's are almost 51" wide in the front and 50" in the rear, by far the best they have ever handled.

K-Dub is correct, width is measured with you on the quad. Have to ride the quad through to vertical posts that are 50" apart. My 250R with +3 arms and 4:1 offset wheels was 49" wide with me on it. With +4 arms I feel you will be closer to 51" wide. 50" wide may not be a rule everywhere, check where you are racing/riding, chances are they don't check and don't care. I have never been checked for width at any event I have raced.

I switch between 4:1 offset wheels and 3:2 offset wheels on my 250R depending on what width I want to be. Yes, the 4:1 offset wheels do handle better, but it is not a huge difference. Also, 3:2 offset wheels do not increase bump steer. Bump steer is the change in toe though suspension travel, wheel offset does not effect that. What you will get is a little more feedback through the bars, since the edge of the wheel is further away from the hub, more leverage can be placed on the spindle. To me, the extra width I gain from a 3:2 wheel is worth the small amount of extra feedback I feel through the bars.

I do agree with OutlawATV4 though, there is no magic width for everyone. One person may like 48" wide, while another may prefer 50" wide. Another thing I have been told is you never want to have the quad wider then the wheelbase is long. So if the wheelbase of the quad is 49.5", you will want to the width to be under that, so 50" would be to wide. No experience with how that effects handling, just something I have been told.

Doug

[K-Dub]

I tried to find the article I read about Walsh frames, but couldnt find it. In this article from back when Walsh was making 250R chassis only, Mike Walsh said in the article that he found the best handling was when the rear was 1" to 2" narrower than the front. That it made the quad track better to have the rear end just a little narrower than the front. It makes sense to me just to think about how a quad tracks, and every quad Ive rode that has a wider rear than front seems to push. I set both my Rs up with the rear narrower than the front, and I like this set up better.

[OutlawATV4]

I am going to definitely look further into this and give some aftermarket companies a call. I was always under the assumption that the rear was to be just as wide or a lttle bit wider for stability but I could most definitely be wrong on this. I think this makes for a good topic discussion for sure, i'll do some digging on my part and see what I come up with. I'll keep you guys posted.

[socal]

Well,I am having Laeger build me some +4 arms I will be running 4/1 offset wheels.Cant wait!Thanks for everyones input!

[89trx250r]

d bergstrom is correct for tracking purpose's you want the rear end about 1-2 inches narrower then your front end pretty much every top pro in atvmx runs a setup a little wider in the front thats where i first heard about it

[250Rhonda]

Wider in the front is the proper setup; it is even a rule used for automobiles as well; one vehicle that has the most obvious case of this is the '80s chevy pick up trucks you can see clearly that the rear tires are about 1-2 inches narrow than the front this not only helps the vehicle track straight it helps while turning as well.

[OutlawATV4]

Socal, I was just curious what kind of frame will you be running your +4 Laeger A-arms on?

[OutlawATV4]

Aso, yea i checked back into the whole width thing, and yea its right to be a little wider in the front then in the rear due to easier turning.

[socal]

Its a stock 06 frame.Will be at 50" up front and about 49" out back!