New A-arms/shocks
- Thread starter ByDesign
- Start date
A
ak
Well-known member
spindle shouldn't have anything to do with it.
http://www.snowest.com/forum/showthread.php?t=366010&highlight=Burandt
More pics
Last edited:
I went with the z-bros 36" kit. Also ordered a set of exit x1's. Looking forward to riding this!
F
FCR112
ACCOUNT CLOSED
Yeah probably time for some phone calls and emails. Both of those guys are very stand up in my experience.
The Alt impact Chromoly arms are a different style, so I wouldn't assume the clearances are the same without verifying it. Especially when there are both 36" and stock width available.
I figured with the thousands of people on the Polaris forum somebody who owns the new evol3 r's or evol3 non-r's would chime in and let everybody know what works
I haven't heard one complaint about the t-sled SR arms either for stock width, a few good choices are out there for sure.
A
ak
Well-known member
Yeah probably time for some phone calls and emails. Both of those guys are very stand up in my experience.
The Alt impact Chromoly arms are a different style, so I wouldn't assume the clearances are the same without verifying it. Especially when there are both 36" and stock width available.
I figured with the thousands of people on the Polaris forum somebody who owns the new evol3 r's or evol3 non-r's would chime in and let everybody know what works
I haven't heard one complaint about the t-sled SR arms either for stock width, a few good choices are out there for sure.
Here ya go no assumption going on here, and if you don't think dans upper chromoly arms will work he can build them like the titanium uppers that's how they use to be.
Last edited:
I spoke with FOX again tonight... Says that there is enough variance in mfg of the polaris swaybar that some fit and others dont.
Burandts EVOL R evol chambers on the 13/14 Float3 R's are in the same non-offset position as all other aftermarket EVOL R's.
Next year... the EVOL cap will have the Rebound adjuster on the same side as the the EVOL chamber and will be able to be mounted with the EVOL chamber end on the bulkhead end of the shock mounting.
.
Burandts EVOL R evol chambers on the 13/14 Float3 R's are in the same non-offset position as all other aftermarket EVOL R's.
Next year... the EVOL cap will have the Rebound adjuster on the same side as the the EVOL chamber and will be able to be mounted with the EVOL chamber end on the bulkhead end of the shock mounting.
.
Last edited:
G
geo
Well-known member
I put on the TS SRA arms and standard EVO 3`s too. NICE shocks and very good valving.
Couple of things I noted during installation. Arms fit well to chassis and kept alignment to simply "measure and bolt it up". Top and bottom arms are made from different materials (bottom is chromoly). Lower shock mount was much too wide (.080") so I installed a 70 thou washer too) and the threads for the shock bolts required recutting (more than just powdercoat removal). Ball joint fit was just "push in by hand" fit so I used green Loctite. A couple of welds were undercut (don't like that with chromo from past experience) but no issues to date. The simple A-frame design of the lower arm required quite a bit of "spindle-fitting" to get full lock to lock use in all the travel.
This may seem to be a bash but it's not. I'm used to needing to fit aftermarket stuff and these are an inexpensive alternative not hand built unobtanium stuff. Good pick for what I call wear items, lol.
The TS EVO 3's were a shock lol to me. These are as good as any dual spring coil overs I have used in all aspects and better in some mountain specific needs. Tuning with a pump instead of tender springs and cross-over shims was way easy.
These shocks are MUCH lighter than a triple rate coil over and a bit lighter than the stock wimpy WE's but I changed mainly for longevity. My experience has shown an air shock can go almost twice as long between servicing compared to the same brand in a coil over. Fox's are outstanding at that anyway compared to WE's.
Another side benefit (we all know about this now lol) is they hold on to less snow.
I mounted them up right and added a spacer between the EVO chamber and body to make them a bit more bomb proof for when I screw up in a tree well lol. So far so good except for one mooshed up airvalve cap lol.
I started with the sway bar but eventually removed it. I found on the Pro chassis, with this shock-valve package, that I needed to lower EVO pressure too much and compromise ride height with the TS rear arm suspension (sit's a bit higher than stock) to get full stroke. This took the rebound stack out of it's sweet spot. Especially the high speed part. Not much nicer than a fresh set-up stock front end IMO.
So I took it out and have not looked back. IMO that is how to use these shocks with the stock width front end, swaybarless. I would think a narrow front end would show this even more as it usually takes less spring to hold up a narrow front end.
Tuning was REALLY simple. Set up ride height with the EVO chamber about 50psi low then bump up 10psi at a time until you only bottom a couple of times. Zap strap on the shock body helps to show travel used.
That's my review of the TS SRA's and their standard EVO 3's.
Couple of things I noted during installation. Arms fit well to chassis and kept alignment to simply "measure and bolt it up". Top and bottom arms are made from different materials (bottom is chromoly). Lower shock mount was much too wide (.080") so I installed a 70 thou washer too) and the threads for the shock bolts required recutting (more than just powdercoat removal). Ball joint fit was just "push in by hand" fit so I used green Loctite. A couple of welds were undercut (don't like that with chromo from past experience) but no issues to date. The simple A-frame design of the lower arm required quite a bit of "spindle-fitting" to get full lock to lock use in all the travel.
This may seem to be a bash but it's not. I'm used to needing to fit aftermarket stuff and these are an inexpensive alternative not hand built unobtanium stuff. Good pick for what I call wear items, lol.
The TS EVO 3's were a shock lol to me. These are as good as any dual spring coil overs I have used in all aspects and better in some mountain specific needs. Tuning with a pump instead of tender springs and cross-over shims was way easy.
These shocks are MUCH lighter than a triple rate coil over and a bit lighter than the stock wimpy WE's but I changed mainly for longevity. My experience has shown an air shock can go almost twice as long between servicing compared to the same brand in a coil over. Fox's are outstanding at that anyway compared to WE's.
Another side benefit (we all know about this now lol) is they hold on to less snow.
I mounted them up right and added a spacer between the EVO chamber and body to make them a bit more bomb proof for when I screw up in a tree well lol. So far so good except for one mooshed up airvalve cap lol.
I started with the sway bar but eventually removed it. I found on the Pro chassis, with this shock-valve package, that I needed to lower EVO pressure too much and compromise ride height with the TS rear arm suspension (sit's a bit higher than stock) to get full stroke. This took the rebound stack out of it's sweet spot. Especially the high speed part. Not much nicer than a fresh set-up stock front end IMO.
So I took it out and have not looked back. IMO that is how to use these shocks with the stock width front end, swaybarless. I would think a narrow front end would show this even more as it usually takes less spring to hold up a narrow front end.
Tuning was REALLY simple. Set up ride height with the EVO chamber about 50psi low then bump up 10psi at a time until you only bottom a couple of times. Zap strap on the shock body helps to show travel used.
That's my review of the TS SRA's and their standard EVO 3's.
Last edited:
G
geo
Well-known member
Had to change screens to get the pressures info lol. Been good for too long. Weird for me lol.
Yes MH, my top arms on my SRA arms are a different material than the lower arms. I'm not complaining, just noting. They still are a c-hair more than .5 lbs lighter than stock.
Without stripping and using some fancy check lol, I just use a magnet. The bottom arms and rear TS arm are a high quality chromo and the magnet shows it. The top arms a very close to the stock steel for % of iron. Close enough that I couldn't tell much difference with the magnet.
With the shocks I started in the shop (sway bar in) and liked 55 for ride height while bouncing around and 110 in the EVO. Out in the field this quickly went down simply because I was only using about 60% of the travel.
Went from 110 down to 75 in the EVO over a few rides and back up. It used more travel but as I went down it "felt" stiffer. Especially when loading one ski like a used side hill or a rough sweeper.
Tried main chamber side along the way too (from 40 to 80 to help the EVO part) but me (245ish dressed) and my sled just liked the 55 best.
So I was reading Snowest lol one day in the DOO section and a FLT3 discussion was going on and someone posted something that got me thinking about the sweet spot between dampening and a spring pressure and rate again.
Ditched the sway bar, set to the original feels-best-bouncing in the shop setting of 55/110 and went out.
Long story short, 55 is my main chamber pressure, going below 90 in the EVO brought back stiff feelings, going over 55 in the main lost usable travel and made me want to crank up the FTS (which I won't do because I've been around the world there before) to get where I like through the bars, and 105 in the EVO was where I liked it during our "racer" Jan. this year lol. Just notes from my "notes" lol.
If someone was asking me what to do with their new TS plain ol' EVO 3's (don't know if their dampening package is different than others), I'd say lol, "Coming from Cat I like them with no sway bar, 55ish in the mains, EVO at 90 most of the time but bump them up to 110ish if your sno-xing"
But that's just me..
Yes MH, my top arms on my SRA arms are a different material than the lower arms. I'm not complaining, just noting. They still are a c-hair more than .5 lbs lighter than stock.
Without stripping and using some fancy check lol, I just use a magnet. The bottom arms and rear TS arm are a high quality chromo and the magnet shows it. The top arms a very close to the stock steel for % of iron. Close enough that I couldn't tell much difference with the magnet.
With the shocks I started in the shop (sway bar in) and liked 55 for ride height while bouncing around and 110 in the EVO. Out in the field this quickly went down simply because I was only using about 60% of the travel.
Went from 110 down to 75 in the EVO over a few rides and back up. It used more travel but as I went down it "felt" stiffer. Especially when loading one ski like a used side hill or a rough sweeper.
Tried main chamber side along the way too (from 40 to 80 to help the EVO part) but me (245ish dressed) and my sled just liked the 55 best.
So I was reading Snowest lol one day in the DOO section and a FLT3 discussion was going on and someone posted something that got me thinking about the sweet spot between dampening and a spring pressure and rate again.
Ditched the sway bar, set to the original feels-best-bouncing in the shop setting of 55/110 and went out.
Long story short, 55 is my main chamber pressure, going below 90 in the EVO brought back stiff feelings, going over 55 in the main lost usable travel and made me want to crank up the FTS (which I won't do because I've been around the world there before) to get where I like through the bars, and 105 in the EVO was where I liked it during our "racer" Jan. this year lol. Just notes from my "notes" lol.
If someone was asking me what to do with their new TS plain ol' EVO 3's (don't know if their dampening package is different than others), I'd say lol, "Coming from Cat I like them with no sway bar, 55ish in the mains, EVO at 90 most of the time but bump them up to 110ish if your sno-xing"
But that's just me..
The 3r's will work will -ALL- my arms. They will work with everything from my widest to narrowest. On the 36" pro arms they want to just to rub the stick on the body so they are close but work just fine. Chris mentioned taking some material off the plastic link but never did because it just wasn't that much of an issue. Sorry I didn't see this post to answer sooner. Thanks!Yeah probably time for some phone calls and emails. Both of those guys are very stand up in my experience.
The Alt impact Chromoly arms are a different style, so I wouldn't assume the clearances are the same without verifying it. Especially when there are both 36" and stock width available.
I figured with the thousands of people on the Polaris forum somebody who owns the new evol3 r's or evol3 non-r's would chime in and let everybody know what works
I haven't heard one complaint about the t-sled SR arms either for stock width, a few good choices are out there for sure.
Dan
Sounds good. Like sledheadd said the 36" is not really that bad on the trail. Unless your a hardcore jumper or mainly trail riding I would steer you in the 36" direction but ultimately it's your decision and what fits the needs. Thanks!Thx Dan just picked up the shocks...And just like that you sold ANOTHER set of A-arms
Dan
what he said
G
geo
Well-known member
I'd like to add,,, I thought about narrower front end before deciding to stay stock.
Where I ride the snow is heavy 85% of the time. I came from wide body sleds lol and narrowed up a few times. Always helped 80% of the time for what I ride because 80% of the time I only sink in about 12 to 18 inches. The other 20% of the time (sink more than 18 "'s) I felt the body drag hindered how much throttle I could put into the track before it spun too much and lost it's line. The slower I rode the less this was an issue though.
I've liked the stock width and narrow Pro in those 20% times enough so that I didn't feel like helping the other 80% of the time.
Different strokes for different folks lol.
Where I ride the snow is heavy 85% of the time. I came from wide body sleds lol and narrowed up a few times. Always helped 80% of the time for what I ride because 80% of the time I only sink in about 12 to 18 inches. The other 20% of the time (sink more than 18 "'s) I felt the body drag hindered how much throttle I could put into the track before it spun too much and lost it's line. The slower I rode the less this was an issue though.
I've liked the stock width and narrow Pro in those 20% times enough so that I didn't feel like helping the other 80% of the time.
Different strokes for different folks lol.
