OK that clears it up a bit.

What your looking at is the width of the arms and how mechanically the wheel would actually travel up and down more just from being further away from the mounting point on the frame, and that isnt what is being referred to when people say long travel.

I have the a-arms you mention and even the houser +1 "long travel" offers a slight mechanical advantage in travel, but the real gain is from the combo of this with the changed (lower) shock mounting point that allows the use of a longer shock with more shaft travel. Its been a while since I measured it and I know I may be getting confused with the travel houser claims but I remember 11-5/8 with the +1 and Elka 19" shocks. I know when I did measure them I came up with a slightly different number than Houser claimed so it could have been 11-1/2 or 11-3/4 etc.

What makes this confusing is that some mfg's advertize the a-arms that use the std length shocks but have a higher misalignment ball joint as long travel also. I dont agree with this or like it because though the a-arm will travel more than the ones with the std joints they are still limited by the shocks and therefore are not going to increase anything.

So the long travel to me is the ones that use the longer shocks with the longer shaft travel and therefore added wheel travel, and the others are high misalignment capable std travel.

Hope that makes sense.

 

Well I think i may have answered that already, but just in case here is a little more (like I didnt take up enough bandwidth already [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-smile.gif[/img] )

Yes a true long travel front end will allow the tire to travel a longer distance, and the people saying it isnt possible need to take a look at the many long travel set ups out there already. I also understand their thought about "underground travel" because if its not set up right its very possible to have the additional travel be below where the shock should have bottomed and hit the bump stop etc, but if its designed right it will not do this and will take advantage of all the lower and upper travel it can.

As far as how much can be gained this depends on a lot of things including the actual model (ever see some like the yfz that have such low top shock mounts) the original design and amount of travel stock, the length of the a-arms, and other more technical stuff as well. I gained around 2-1/2" give or take with my set up and the difference between it and the std travel is considerable.

What I cant explain is why the people making this stuff create these confusing situations and just cause it to be so damn hard to compare suspension, but more than once I have thought it could be intentional lol.

If anyone wants to read up on stuff like this I had started a thread about a year ago on here that discusses more different issues and tech on suspension than any I have seen anyware, but it is a little long. I think its worth the read, and has some good info on specific applications too.

Anyhow here is a link for those with the will to gain knowledge etc

everything about suspension, sort of