Author Topic: pilot rear suspension  (Read 1858 times)

ludedude

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
pilot rear suspension
« on: June 29, 2005, 09:04:25 PM »
In stock form...the rear suspension, is it maxed out inthe compression direction with the stock shock setup? It is the upper A-arm that hits the frame  in compression that is the limiting factor there, correct? And at that point the frame is nearly on the ground...right?

In extension, again in OEM form, it's the stock shock stroke that is limiting the extension travel correct? The CV's will handle more than the shock allows....The limiting factor to how far you can go (with a different shock is limited in extension by the inner CV, correct?

Would the pilot benefit from more travel in the rear without longer A-arms so that the overall width stayed the same (if the CV bind was overcome)? Or would it sit higher and be too unstable at that height without the wider stance of  longer rear A-arms?

hoodlum

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
  • Karma: 11
    • View Profile
Rear travel
« Reply #1 on: June 30, 2005, 05:45:11 AM »
As we were riding at DP in June, I had my first opportunity to see the long travel set up for the first time and also watch it in action as I followed a couple of guys that had it.  My ? is, just how effective is this on the rear?
On the LT's,the rear skid plate seemed to be no  farther off of the ground than the stock set up, therefore limiting the travel to no more than the stock. When the plate hits the ground, the suspension is through, no matter how long the shocks are. A person could put on rear arms that were 20' long, but until the clearance on the rear is raised, what good does it do?
Then when you raise the rear, that also raises the center of gravity, thus making the pilot less stable.
I guess my other ? is, is it worth it? I mean the $$$ and all the fabbing involved to install? There has to be benefits or people wouldn't do it, but what are they?
Seems to me that the  travel in the rear would be more affected by not only longer arms, but a shock mounted closer to the stock mount on the frame, thus raising the rear higher off the ground.
I may be missing the point completely, thats why I asked. Educate me!!!
Rooky

rocketman

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 52
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
pilot rear suspension
« Reply #2 on: June 30, 2005, 10:13:46 AM »
The LTs are typically setup with a lot more droop - it sets deeper into the suspension in a static condition.  This allows more drop out when you go over a hole, ditch, berm etc - the whole buggy doesn't drop into the depression as much.  Tends to ride more on top.  The other big benefit is when you get the wheels off the ground (jumping for example).  The wheel/suspension goes into full droop (which is more than on a stock pilot) there is much more range of motion for the suspension (longer damping stroke) to absorb the shock so it doesn't have to be as stiff (harsh).

hoodlum

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 857
  • Karma: 11
    • View Profile
LT
« Reply #3 on: June 30, 2005, 12:11:50 PM »
Gotcha. Thanks for educating me! Learned something new today. That makes it a better day.

ludedude

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
pilot rear suspension
« Reply #4 on: June 30, 2005, 12:47:56 PM »
Cool, so then with CV's that could handle more angle, you could do the same to a stock length A-arm/axle setup, with shocks setup for that.....Hmmmm

Moskito

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 396
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
    • http://www.yellowdogracing.com
pilot rear suspension
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2005, 06:09:48 AM »
I got 8.5" (I think???) of travel out of the Frankenskeeter's rear end (stock arms and links - longer stroke shocks).

The two things I had to watch for were:

1) CV bind - the biggy of the two.
Take the shocks off, let the suspension fall to full extension allowed by the CV joints up at the tranny then raise the suspension about 1/4" to eliminate the bind. - I can't recall just how much more droop travel I was able to get, but it was a decent amount.  You want to rotate the drive train when checking this, as the CVs will give a tad more extension at the point where the axle falls into the ball recesses inside the cup.  You would want to do the reduction from the point where you have the least amount of droop at the binding point of the CVs.  (does that make sense?)

2) Frame Bottoming.  This will/can depend on the diameter of tire you're running.  A shorter profile tire is going to remove some of the clearance available at full compression.

As Rocket said, you need/want droop (about 1/3 available travel is a great starting point) in your ride when it's sitting on the ground, full of fuel and a body.   The suspension needs to be able to extend as well as compress when you're in it and running.
Moskito - Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming \'WOW-What a Ride!\'

ludedude

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1478
  • Karma: 0
    • View Profile
pilot rear suspension
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2005, 09:24:03 AM »
I talked with WORKS, late last week. They say the best they can do is a 20-1/2 long shock with a 6-3/4" stroke. ELKA won't touch Pilot shoxks again, so they're out...who next...FOX? I haven't tried cycling the suspension, without the shocks on...I did it before when ordering the ELKA's...i have to see if I can find my notes on that. I think I figured I could use 8-3/4" stroke..I think I got 7-3/4" with the ELKA's...in the pilot stock geometry, shock travel is only slightly less than wheel travel, it's almost one for one. I can get Axles made with 42? CV's on the inner as well as the outside instead of the outer only. This would allow increased travel, but need a shock that can handle the increased stroke that that would need. May not be able to do it without adding the LT shock hoops...but I'd like to try and get more while retaining stock width axles and A-arms.

Thoughts?