Ascender Elevate twin rail set up & measurements

[MrIQR]

I have a twin rail converted alpha with elevate spindles and rails. Skid mounted in the lower holes, has more ski pressure then I like. My axys is a pro with the front skid mount dropped on pilot and I love it, this cat is a tank in comparison when needing to pull it on edge in “interesting” off chamber situations whereas my axys is effortless.

so …

I’m thinking of moving the fts rail mounting point forward to get more weight off the skis. I know Ice Age did this to accomplish some lift but I do not feel it’s enough(for me personally).
Does anyone know how much further ice age moved the mounting point and how much lift it created?

Was it 3/4” forward to get 3/4” lift?

 

[line8]

I had an 18 MC with elevate.
It was an interesting ride at first. I had the shocks revalved from M9 after a few rides. That Fixed everything. Front end was light with new skid shock pressures. No more ski diving. It was very good. I think they should put a disclaimer on their site that they recommend a revalve for the elevate. Call Ice Age and talk about it with them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MrIQR]

The front is lifted 2” and the skid 1.75”? On my axys I prefer the skid dropped and the spindles stock but this cat needed the chassis raised out of the snow.

Do you know what style shim(2stage?) stacks these have? Are they posted anywhere? I’m assuming they are just firming the slow speed up to get the shock to ride higher in the stroke.

It handles good but in tight situations when I need to get it on edge when I’m stopped it takes more effort then I want. My axys I can stand beside it in the shop and pull it on edge easily, can’t do that with the cat.

 

[line8]

I would talk with Darren at M9 suspension. He’s pretty knowledgeable about the fox shocks and elevate.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[boondocker97]

You could try putting the rear skid mount back up in the stock hole to get the skid to pivot on the front track shock more. Or add pressure to the front track shock and take a little out of the rear. Might make the rear bottom pretty easy doing that though.

 

[line8]

You could try putting the rear skid mount back up in the stock hole to get the skid to pivot on the front track shock more. Or add pressure to the front track shock and take a little out of the rear. Might make the rear bottom pretty easy doing that though.

That was a problem I was having also. Rear would bottom out easily when set for rider weight. Or tighten up and it was a log truck.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MrIQR]

You could try putting the rear skid mount back up in the stock hole to get the skid to pivot on the front track shock more. Or add pressure to the front track shock and take a little out of the rear. Might make the rear bottom pretty easy doing that though.

I was thinking of that also, going to try it. I really like a distinct center pivot point.

 

[Suzzy-Q]

I find this interesting as I have a 17MC with elevate kit. And I found it so much easier to get on edge, no more ski pressure then before and with the FTS geometry change I run lower PSI in my FTS then I did pre elevate, I do have mowhawk skis though not stock. Is your FTS air or coil over?

 

[MrIQR]

You could try putting the rear skid mount back up in the stock hole to get the skid to pivot on the front track shock more. Or add pressure to the front track shock and take a little out of the rear. Might make the rear bottom pretty easy doing that though.

Tried it, not what I’m looking for. The front of the skid needs to be lower.

I remember seeing the distance ice age moved the front track shock forward on the rail but can’t find it now, was it 3/4”?

 

[MrIQR]

I find this interesting as I have a 17MC with elevate kit. And I found it so much easier to get on edge, no more ski pressure then before and with the FTS geometry change I run lower PSI in my FTS then I did pre elevate, I do have mowhawk skis though not stock. Is your FTS air or coil over?

Well you lifted the front 2” and only dropped the front of the skid 1.5” and the rear even less so you in deed have more ski pressure. Wish I would have put it on some scales before and after.

I’m very particular about set up and want no ski pressure, which I accomplished by dropping the front of my skid on my axys. It goes from edge to edge effortlessly, easier then a alpha. Handles absolutely horrible on trail but can’t be beat in technical trees, but I have noticed that these QS3’s are over valved on the compression and rebound, I’d consider it a trail set up, was hoping to not revalve but looking like it will be needed even though I’m going to move the front track shock forward to get some more weight on it and off the skis.

 

[sno*jet]

werent you running a dropped skid with stock spindles before? maybe go back to that or a lesser raised spindle like ZRP or Mtn. Side. Seems a little goofy to me. i like trees, but i like climbing through them with control. I did raised spindles (Mtn. Side) with stock skid last year and thought that was great for technical, still getting used to the wilder elevate rail setup this year. Great improvement for sidehilling no doubt, Im not 100% used to the turnout tricks when it raises up on me sometimes. Was thinking full 2" longer spindles probably best with this setup but not spending the money for another .5". Would do a trade if someone wanted tho.

 

[Suzzy-Q]

Well you lifted the front 2” and only dropped the front of the skid 1.5” and the rear even less so you in deed have more ski pressure. Wish I would have put it on some scales before and after.

I’m very particular about set up and want no ski pressure, which I accomplished by dropping the front of my skid on my axys. It goes from edge to edge effortlessly, easier then a alpha. Handles absolutely horrible on trail but can’t be beat in technical trees, but I have noticed that these QS3’s are over valved on the compression and rebound, I’d consider it a trail set up, was hoping to not revalve but looking like it will be needed even though I’m going to move the front track shock forward to get some more weight on it and off the skis.

Yes totally get and agree how the amount of drop and where the pressure would be added. That is if you didn’t change anything about shock set up. Shock set up will compensate for that ski pressure but can a guy achieve the set up he wants without adding ski pressure I guess that’s up to some trial and error.

 

[Suzzy-Q]

werent you running a dropped skid with stock spindles before?

I also did this. There were some benefits but the sled felt unbalanced in some scenarios. So far with my limited riding this year the raised spindles fix that unbalanced feeling with the dropped skid. How much a guy needs to raise or how much difference if any comes from the different raised spindles would be interesting. If only a guy has endless time/money lol

 

[MrIQR]

For me having just the skid dropped handled better, I hate ski pressure, I only care about easy of pull over in technical situations but the chassis rode way too low without the elevate spindles so they were a must.

Currently I’m running 110 psi in fts, 55 in the skis, 135 rts and it still has more ski then I want. It’s not very playful and which is due to the valving, it simply has way too much on both the compression and rebound. Maybe next week I’ll get the shocks opened up and make some valving changes, get the chassis to move more freely.

I also am going to move the lower front shock mount forward to get more lift and weight off the skis or maybe I should just quit messing around and get a new Polaris.

 

[Suzzy-Q]

I’m a little bit apples to oranges on the steering because I have laydown steering. But I have little to no more ski pressure and sled is plenty playful, easier to put on edge, I think it may even cut a side hill better especially deep snow ones. I’m currently running but not quite happy with, 40/150 FTS 120/160 RTS, and I think 60/80 on my skis (all float evols)