No link Vs Cr500 link for XC Quad

[quadfmx]

I know the Cr500 would hang down lower than the no link seeing as how the cr500 has a linkage that hangs down that a no link does not have.

Would there make that much of a difference between the two,
I mean if you found a great deal on one would u go ahead and pay the premium price for the no link, with them having the same exact setup.

Also can anyone remember any pro's running cr500 style rear ends when all the pro's were running he 250R?
Thanks for the help

I know MX guys had good luck with no link and cr500 link but I really need to know about XC

[RyanWsly]

Look at a YFZ rear linkage and you will get you will answer your own question.

[quadfmx]

so am I correct in assuming that the CR500 and the YFZ linkage hang down the same amount

[RyanWsly]

very similar setups, I believe the CR500 linkage can be setup to be more versitile over a no-link setup from what I've always read. Both gain over factory setups on a chassis like yours because of the length of the shock and the travel.

[quadfmx]

agreed on the benefit over stock,

I as most curious if any and what pros ran a cr500 link back in the 250R days, and how the 250R experts here thought the no link and the cr500 link would stack up against each other in pro and cons

[RyanWsly]

This article explains it pretty well and also tells you what one ran: http://www.gtthunder.com/Suspensions.htm old off of this site: http://www.exriders.com/vbb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=337954 That covers the top two in GNCC results and I know Sloan ran a Roll no-link, personal preference is most likely the deciding factor.

[Burns310r]

No link would be a great advantage on the XC scene.

Period.

You dont have the major jumps, and dont need the gobs of suspension travel that the full blown MX guys have. The great ground clearance, combined with a much better setup that stock is the key to the no link.

The full blown MX is where the CR500 shines for its ability to smooth out the small rough stuff and soak up all the big stuff.

[quadfmx]

i had always heard what the last post above said,

its funny i had read the GTT page prob 20 times in the past,


I agree that the ground clearance adv. of the no link would be a great advantage but it puts so much importance on the shock being setup correctly,

read that link above to the GTT page and it will make you wonder,
like if no link is so much better why is KTM the only company bike or quad still using a no link setup.

slot of people say that when everyone was running no link it was the best avail of the time but now the tech has improved and the link is a higher tech than the no link,

Im not saying one is better than the other,
Id like to hear from someone who hs used both in XC, I really think the ground clearance is the main adv. Jeremiah Jones won the MX title one year on a no link and another year on the cr 500.

Was there any guys running cr500 R in Xc before they went to 4 strokes

[RyanWsly]

I have a no-link on my stock frame, guy from axis stressed how important setup on my shock was due to no-link but the main area of concern was the length of my shock vs an aftermarket, there is much less margin for error on a stock frame no-link. you need to look again at that picture that was posted of Hawks old 250R, you must have missed that it was a CR500 linked chassis when looking at the picture. My friend owned a Laeger narrow CR500 link XC and I raced it once but the suspension was way off and needed serviced bad but for your question I never noticed any problems with the linkage. I will say it grabs less stuff then the stock for sure. Hopefully the guy that posted that picture of Hawks old chassis will see this and have some input from his friend, it seems like I've seen that name recently on here. One other thing you mentioned was KTM, that article is old and KTM has gone away from no-link on their bikes I believe 2010 was the last year for no-link on at least some of their bikes. I don't believe Roll ever offered a linked version of it's Lobo or at least I've never seen one and Roll was very popular for an XC chassis so I've always assumed that's why no-link was common on aftermarkets in XC. I'm sure both can be made to perform very well if the right guy was tuning it even by todays standards.

[mx91a]

I'm not sure why everybody is so concearned with the linkage when it comes to ground clearance for XC riding. Whether you have stock 250R, CR-500, no-link or 450R linkage the lowest point on the quad is always going to be the sprocket/brake rotor. Run a good skidplate that covers these and your linkage and you should have nothing to worry about. Go with what your frame or manufacturing abilities and wallet can accept, get it set up for your weight, riding ability and style and go out and have fun.