Suspension Travel... a double edged sword??

[Derrick Adams]

I just finished my CR500 rear shock conversion on the 250R. I installed mine with the stock linkage. The 500 shock is appr. 1" longer than the 250R shock. This raised the rear of my trike about 3". So the pondering question is whether the added height will be an advantage or a disadvantage. I fear that it may hender the turning ability of the bike.

So my seat height is now at 32". That's one inch lower than my Z. The bike now fits me great and I feel alot more comfortable on it. I now have 13" of clearance from my frame to the ground. I'm going to test it out tommorrow and see how it works. With lots of travel and soft compression it should soak up whoops like their not there, but turning may be it's downfall. Sure looks goofy though!

So what do you think? Compromise suspension and bottom out on big jumps to turn faster, or soak up the jumps and loose some handling capabilities?

Just for the people who don't know me. The reason I did this is because i'm 6'4" and 240lb. No stock trike was made to handle what I want to do with it.

[TimSr]

My first question is whether you have any more travel, or if you are just raising the height. A longer shock does not equal more travel, and it may just bottom out 3" higher than it did before. When you compare a Works shock to a stock one, for example, the length is the same, but the Works has more chrome shaft extended, which gives you more travel.

[Derrick Adams]

Good question. Verdict is still out on that one. I looked at both shocks before I installed the 500 shock and both seemed to have 4" of shaft visible. I have the 500 shock on now and it has about 1 1/2" of sag. So i'm guessing they're similar. I'm curious to see whether the Ohlins shock is better or worse than the stocker. Sure is Beefy!

Brian told me that if I add a TRX dog bone to my stock shock I can also raise it that way. So if this shock doesn't work out, i'll try that.

[OldSchoolin86]

I could tell a night and day difference lowering my trike just 1" in the rear. Three inches higher for me would be horrible but we have two completely different trikes. I think seat time is the best test but but if it was mine I'd be loooking for a way to drop it.

[Jason Hall]

Derrick I don't know what your suspention set up looks like, does it have any linkage like a 250-r? I would suggest you set your ride height were you want it, & see if you have enough shock travel / linkage movment before the swing arm bottoms out against the frame. If you really want you can modifi the down travel (when your suspention is fully compressed), that will set it up to run good both ways (jumping /turning). If you take the spring off your rear shock, & put it back on the machine you can easily move the swing arm up & down to set up your travel.

[TeamGeek6]

That might depend on the type of riding and how much sliding is done. I like a low rear end and low profile tires for flat slides, but a little more travel on jumps isnt bad either.

[Derrick Adams]

Well I tested it out on the MX track today. It seemed to be a little tippier in the turns but more than made up for it in the jumps. It really soaks the whoops up great. I only managed to bottom it out once. I think i'll work on some custom lower shock mounts to make it adjustable and use more of the shock.

I have some wheel spacers on the way, hopefully that will get the stability back.

[Billy Golightly]

Any pictures of your setup Derrick? I might swap my CR500 frontend onto my Z until I can get an inverted setup...

[OldSchoolin86]

Any pictures of your setup Derrick? I might swap my CR500 frontend onto my Z until I can get an inverted setup...

I like that better then inverts myself. 43mm forks is a big improvement and what's important to me is still being able to slide them up and down with ease.

[Billy Golightly]

I like that better then inverts myself. 43mm forks is a big improvement and what's important to me is still being able to slide them up and down with ease.

You cant slide up the CR500 forks either though. Their turned down in the section inbetween the top and bottom tripple clamp. Its a smaller diameter there and it would just flop around in the clamps. And in order to get them at the right height you have to slide them up till their above the handle bars...kinda dangerous!

[OldSchoolin86]

You cant slide up the CR500 forks either though. Their turned down in the section inbetween the top and bottom tripple clamp. Its a smaller diameter there and it would just flop around in the clamps. And in order to get them at the right height you have to slide them up till their above the handle bars...kinda dangerous!

Opps, I ment conventionals like pre 89. I've been eyeing them up for my project. They ran similar conventionals on XR bike up untill a few years ago. That would be that way I'd go.

[Billy Golightly]

lol Frank, I AM talking about the pre 89 conventional ones. Mine are turned down, and you cant slide them up more then like half an inch or you get to the surface where the clamps wont hold it.

[RedRider_AK]

It all depends on what you run, I think. Tight trails would be worse, long straight tracks and huge doubles would be good.

[OldSchoolin86]

lol Frank, I AM talking about the pre 89 conventional ones. Mine are turned down, and you cant slide them up more then like half an inch or you get to the surface where the clamps wont hold it.

Opps again, I'm sorry. I saw a set of shocks at a junk yard last week and the guy said they were 87 CR500 forks. They didn't have any turn down on the tubes. He must not have known what they were. Now I wonder what they were.

[Billy Golightly]

They could have been CR5' forks, I dunno. Mine are turned down in the middle though. I Dont know if the set Derrick has is like that too or not.