standard travel vs. long travel

[z400bs]

Right now I have standard travel elka shocks with leager a-arms. I want to upgrade eventually to a better shock but would it be worth it to go head and save for long travel? I only race districts c class and moving up to b class eventually. What would be the best thing to do?

[deathman53]

you probably won't notice a difference. long travel really should be called "long body or long shock". It has nearly the same amount of travel, where the long body/shock comes in is that it holds more oil and more nitrogen. It resists fading better and is more consistent. Very few of us can out ride a stand length shock with the correct valving, compression and spring rate.

[johnsoninc86]

^what he said, along with the advantage of it being easier for builders to achieve the right shock setup. There's more room for them to play with in terms of shock settings, so they have a better chance of getting your setup right on the money, but in terms of better performance, you're not going to see one if both the long travel and standard travel shocks are setup right...

[fomospede]

you didnt mention the style of racing
correct spring rate and valving is most important
with either setup
that being said very few understand how to correctly setup there machine
this would leave me to believe that you should focus on your setup not just
ride heigth
clicker adjustment
how about squaring your machine with the rear
toe in or out
and most important
is riding style and how you can raise the bar with your effort
what im saying is if you throw cash at it
it may be faster but can u take it there??
i ride on standard travel
xc
if i was mx id be on LT

[Pacheco_450r]

I like what fomospede said, it's definitely more about setup than which shock or travel you get. Persnally I went from stock to a used long travel setup only because the price was too good to pass up for what I was getting! I ride mostly mx with some dunes and trail, and I'm happy with the lt. As long as you get the right setup I think regular travel will be just fine!

[BlaineKaiser450]

I always used to have long travel Motowoz eveything, and I don't think it could get much better. I've ridden standard travel aftermarket suspensions set up for very similar weight and skill as my LT and noticed a difference on some of the much larger tabletops and such, but not anywhere else

[Smoker]

I've had standard travel Elka's and now have long travel Elka's. The long travel is much more forgiving on ride and bottoming.

[quadfmx]

It's all how it's setup
I had a set up elks STD travel on houser arms gtt link that laz re done some of the best shocks I've ridden,
I rode lots of friends with newer lt setups and I would notvhave swapped, not even considered it without a good bit of cash
A. Shock builder told me that the long body shocks were easier for them to get right, but if u had STD travel setup correctly it was just as good,
They only thing the lypt has like mentioned above is they have more gas and wick nit overheat as quickly if they have more gas


I don't know if ur talking mx or xc
But look at Brian wolf ran pro on STD travel rebuilds and was competitive, ockerman ran stock shocks with that lt stealth conversion and was competitive also

[hartwill]

Long travel shocks do travel more than standard travel. The shock mounts are moved farther out or lower on the a arms which requires a longer shock and also requires a longer shaft stroke. It's the arms them selves that don't usually travel more than standard travel but even that is not always true, Walsh and roll design both claim over 11" of wheel travel.. I'd like to see that out of your stock arms and shocks:)
And as stated above the extra oil and nitrogen helps with the valving but they do make big bottle standard shocks.. The longer shaft travel makes the transition much nicer..

[C41Xracer]

long travel doesnt give any more travel, a +1 long travel a arm and a +1 standard travel a arm move the same distance the same applies to a +2 and +3 arm.

[Scro]

Originally posted by hartwill
Walsh and roll design both claim over 11" of wheel travel.. I'd like to see that out of your stock arms and shocks:)

The amount of travel is limited by the range of motion in the balljoints. The stock balljoints don't have that kind of range. Aftermarket frontends have balljoints/heims that allow that kind of travel. But, too much of good thing can be bad.

[hartwill]

Originally posted by Scro
The amount of travel is limited by the range of motion in the balljoints. The stock balljoints don't have that kind of range. Aftermarket frontends have balljoints/heims that allow that kind of travel. But, too much of good thing can be bad.
I know that but even with a reputable a arm builder I don't see any claiming 11" of wheel travel out of their standard travel a arms.. I said you don't always get the same amount of wheel travel between the two because there are a select few companies who's product does give you more travel. I find it kinda funny how those two mentioned are also considered the best in the biz... Here's another link comparing the standard vs LT.
http://www.laegerracing.com/component/content/article/1-latest-news/60-what-a-arms-are-right-for-me-

[D Bergstrom]

Originally posted by hartwill
Long travel shocks do travel more than standard travel.

Not true in my case. On my stock framed 250R, I used to have Elka standard length shocks and Laeger +3+1 standard shock a-arms. I measured about 10 1/2" of wheel travel with this setup. I then switched to Motowoz long shocks and +2.5+1 Teixeira Tech long shock a-arms, measured about the same 10 1/2" of wheel travel. The only difference, was with the Motowoz/Teixeira Tech setup, I could get the bottomed out frame height lower, which worked better with my setup. That and the Motowoz shocks had a better setup then the Elka's did.

I have never seen anyone claim wheel travel number for regular travel a-arms. Also, I don't believe to many claims anyway. Years ago I had a set of Houser +2.5 long shock arms on my 450R. Houser claimed right around 12" of travel, I measured less then 11". (Don't remember the exact numbers as that was years ago, but I do remember that the amount of travel I measured was over an inch less then what Houser claimed.) As far as I am concerned, 11" or so is about all the travel you will get out of a quad front end without something binding.

To me, the biggest difference between the two types of front ends is where that travel is located. Long shock arms have more potential to get the bottomed out and extend frame heights where you want them due to the fact they are not working with the stock shock mounting locations. As far as I am concerend, you could probably get a standard shock front end to work just as well as a long shock front end for 90% of the riders out there.

Doug

[hartwill]

With that statement I was reffering to the stroke of the shocks shaft, not wheel travel.

[D Bergstrom]

Originally posted by hartwill
With that statement I was reffering to the stroke of the shocks shaft, not wheel travel.

Yeah, you are correct, I should have paid more attention to what I quoted, but further into that same post you mention that a long shock front will get more wheel travel then a standard shock front, I was just pointing out that that is not always the case. You are correct about shaft travel though. If I remember correctly, my old Elka's had just over 4 1/2" of shaft travel, while my Motowoz have 5 1/2". Another reason long shocks can be made to work better, better leverage ratios.

Doug