Show us yer FSR's

Re: Re:

twain":y0nj4ns2 said:
electronicaeric":y0nj4ns2 said:
Sorry my bad.I thought this thread was in the 98> section.

Will do. :D

no - thats my bad - this is the 1998---> section of the website - i meant to say the bike chat 1998---> section - if you start a new thread, it will get more views and comments that way :) pics always help though :xmas-wink:

:facepalm: :D

No problems.Still looking for info :D
 
100-110 is probably the most travel recommended for these frames before it starts throwing the geometry out.
anything more and the angle would be too slack and handling would be affected/climbing would become more of a joke....
i've seen some with 120-130mm but you can see how slack it makes it, and some have upgraded rear links to counter this, but it then lits the BB height up more, which again would change the ride as it wasnt intended - unless you're talking a Sean Palmer frame of course ;) :twisted:

depends how you be riding it - XC? D-Hill? Free ride?! :p :shock:
 
Re:

It's a normal travel 98, I have a 2000 Rockhopper A1 comp turning up, going to make the long travel ride which I would like to 120mm travel forks and longer rear shock,
 
Rear suspension linkage....how free/tight

Just wondering how tight/loose the rear bushings should be. A couple months ago, I changed out the original shock for a Fox FloatRL on my '99 FSR and I noticed the weight of the whole rear assembly wasn't enough to get the linkage to move. I could push it down (with no shock) and lift it up again with the rear end stuck in the compressed position. I would have thought it would be looser than that. No slop is good but...........too tight is bad, and I am guessing it is just that but I'm not sure with no prior dealings with these.
 
What do you mean "by feel"? By design, there shouldn't be any "feel" to tightening the bolts up in regards to rear assembly movement. The bolts tighten down to the spacers inside the bushings in which they rotate.
 
Back
Top