+2" or +2" +1" forward ?

Message

SlOoT · #1 Post by **SlOoT** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 5:54 pm

I want to put +2" a-arms on my quad. Should I go with +1" forward or not ?

TBD · #2 Post by **TBD** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:19 pm

QUOTE (SlOoT @ Jul 13 2006, 10:54 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I want to put +2" a-arms on my quad. Should I go with +1" forward or not ?

What kind of riding do you do most? If I were building a desert quad I would go +1 forward but if you do more trails and mx then I wouldn't recomend +1" forward.

SlOoT · #3 Post by **SlOoT** » Thu Jul 13, 2006 7:36 pm

I use it for MX only.

RXM · #4 Post by **RXM** » Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:00 pm

QUOTE (SlOoT @ Jul 13 2006, 07:36 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I use it for MX only.

Like TBD said, Dont go +1 forward.

theJeStEr1340 · #5 Post by **theJeStEr1340** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:43 pm

I have a question for yah. My dad has a set of +2+1's on his bike, and when he put them on he also lowered the bike (ELka SSD's) and the turning is atrocious. My Moto is so easy to turn and his is just so stiff. What causes this? It is the pressure on the Tie rods from it being +1 forward? My moto steering gets a little stiffer when it is on a stand and it is almost all the way turned, but never when it is on the ground with the suspension compressed like my dads.

Eric, Would your a-arms be good for TT, The design looks like it is only good for desert or XC where you want the ground clearance, we want to keep the center of gravity low and out arms are usually paralell to the ground. Oh and do you make std travel +2 arms, my dad is looking for some +2's (not +2+1's, but std travel and good for TT) the only ones we have seen are LSR's and he want's $700 for them.

cannondale27 · #6 Post by **cannondale27** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:44 am

I am almost positive Moto arms are +1forward.Anyway if you want to get frontend light go with +1 forward if not then dont.

SlOoT · #7 Post by **SlOoT** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:07 pm

according to the manual the Moto is 0.5 inch longer then the other models.

kdeal · #8 Post by **kdeal** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 12:21 am

QUOTE (SlOoT @ Jul 17 2006, 12:07 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

according to the manual the Moto is 0.5 inch longer then the other models.

That's +2.5" wider, but I don't know about more foward.

C27: Why would the front end get lighter if you are moving the weight of the wheels more foward? Do you mean easier to turn?

cannondale27 · #9 Post by **cannondale27** » Sun Jul 30, 2006 6:13 am

Front end gets lighter because center of gravity is moved back.Wierd but true.

ACEwrench · #10 Post by **ACEwrench** » Fri Nov 24, 2006 9:58 pm

QUOTE (cannondale27 @ Jul 29 2006, 10:13 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Front end gets lighter because center of gravity is moved back.Wierd but true.

i know this is an old topic but how is COG moved backward???if the COG is already towards the front i can see it. i was always told c-dales were pretty close to evenly weighted front to back.

if you lenghten a quad your turning radius will be bigger,but you will be much more stable at high speeds(in a straight line) . such is the case with our racing YFZs. YFZ wheel bases a re fairly short as they were designed as an MX quad. the COG is a little forward and twichy on hight speed woops (as an example). we put a +1 swinger on our quad even to get the COG back abit to help the ride and the rear shock.we eventually went with a +1 forward a-arm too the help at high speed.
even when we raced dales in the desert we didnt lenghten the quad (they track flawlessly stock)...arent motos close to a 50 in WB anyway??.
id think if you shortened up a dale it wouldnt handle well... the front end would be heavy but it would turn sharper.

dont TT guys shorten their swing arm?...i assume its for 2 reasons... handling(steering) and traction..