[aTVitsnot]

Crazy idea? or just a fun thing to discuss?

This Thread caused me to ponder the question Has anyone ever experimented with fabbing shock linkage for the stock swingarm on the solid axle model Hondas?

If it could be done, the ride would be more comfortable and faster reacting to square edged irregularities in the trail. It would be more resistant to bottoming and just generally improve control in hairy terrain.

 

[retro]

Thats an interesting idea. You'd need to increase the suspension travel to take full advantage of the linkage, but I imagine with good design and proper geometry you'd be getting longer travel capability from the mod itself. Are you gonna do it? I wanna watch...

EDIT: A lighter aluminum swingarm would really improve a stocker. With the linkage mod and the right shock on an aluminum LTR swingarm... I can't imagine how much better that ride might be!

 

[aTVitsnot]

A lighter aluminum swingarm would really improve a stocker. With the linkage mod and the right shock on an aluminum LTR swingarm... I can't imagine how much better that ride might be!

AND...it would still have the utility benifit of the solid axle (garden tractor) models. i.e. trailering, harrow plowing, etc.

As to "are you going to build it"; not likely. Not anytime soon anyway. Too many other projects in line ahead of any new ones.

Sometimes ideas fester and mature in ones skull. Other times they just shrivel up and....

 

[SamUK]

Good idea but.... how do you go about keeping rear u joint angles correct, ground clearance, overall strength... It’s a tricky one. I should imagine the cost of a good shock, Fox for example, would give an equally comfortable ride. I’d buy an IRS for comfort and an SRA for tractor type duties.

 

[aTVitsnot]

First of all, I don't see increasing travel as a necessity of a rising rate design. But, this is one very complex (as in expensive) way to resolve the issue of articulating universal joints;

But BMW's motivation here was to reverse frame jacking from throttle application. Instead of negative squat under acceleration typically experienced by shaft drive bikes, the paralever is intended to induce pro-squat.

Pro-squat is the chassis reaction a chain driven bike has to acceleration. It enhances traction by putting weight on the rear wheel.

Negative squat is an opposite reaction which throws the chassis upwards and lightens the load on the tire. The result is wheel spin under enthusiastic throttle application. One possibile consequence of this reaction is spitting the rider skyward and the bike into the ditch. Non crashers have to wait for lean angle to decrease before any throttle whacking action is taken if they want to remain unscathed.

But I digress. In my fantasy, this mod is a stick welder applied bracket to accommodate salvage yard links and a custom rebound and compression adjustable valved (possibly shorter) remote reservoir shock. Maybe an increased angle from top to bottom mount would eliminate ground clearance concerns

Wouldn't the shaft angle/s remain the same if the travel wasn't increased?

 

[SamUK]

I don’t understand your theory in wanting rising rate link design when the stock spring is already a rising rate design. The issues I see with the stock setup are damping, compression and rebound, all of which can be overcome by a good quality shock, or even two.
As we see in a lot of competitive motorsports nowadays folks have realised that damping is very necessary, hence a lot of off-road vehicles using two dampers per corner.
Stock 420 ranchers are a good candidate for this discussion, very softly sprung in the rear but a little under damped and lack slightly in rebound too however, for an SRA they are a comfortable ride for a stock ATV.

Edit: From my brief experiences with dirt bikes (MX) I believe the only reason for using the link design is to gain more travel and still being able to limit the size of the shock. Like most mono shock machines of today.

 

[mrbb]

personally like many idea's its NOT going to be cost worth it here IMO< you can buy two machines and have one for work and one for ride quality, over MAKING one fit, as after all is aid and done, this is still a LOW HP rancher your having
there are a LOT of different model atv's out there, to fit a person's ideal machine better
seldom do you get everything you want, but you can get things that fit you on larger percentages
I'd love to see what your thinking in action, but again, is the costs worth it. even if you had the time?

 

[aTVitsnot]

personally like many idea's its NOT going to be cost worth it here IMO< you can buy two machines and have one for work and one for ride quality, over MAKING one fit, as after all is aid and done, this is still a LOW HP rancher your having
there are a LOT of different model atv's out there, to fit a person's ideal machine better
seldom do you get everything you want, but you can get things that fit you on larger percentages
I'd love to see what your thinking in action, but again, is the costs worth it. even if you had the time?

I agree with everything you said; especially the bold print. Maybe the real question should be "how curious are you?"

It's a fun thing to discuss with like minded sorts, isn't it? A cold beverage could possibly enhance the conversation, but virtual beer leaves me flat.

 

[mrbb]

personally like many idea's its NOT going to be cost worth it here IMO< you can buy two machines and have one for work and one for ride quality, over MAKING one fit, as after all is aid and done, this is still a LOW HP rancher your having
there are a LOT of different model atv's out there, to fit a person's ideal machine better
seldom do you get everything you want, but you can get things that fit you on larger percentages
I'd love to see what your thinking in action, but again, is the costs worth it. even if you had the time?

I agree with everything you said; especially the bold print. Maybe the real question should be "how curious are you?"

It's a fun thing to discuss with like minded sorts, isn't it? A cold beverage could possibly enhance the conversation, but virtual beer leaves me flat.

HAHA< I hear you, I love seeing some of the wild custom builds some folks have the means to create
but I gave up on that stuff yrs back, as far as owning for myself, all them custom parts add up to a LOT of $$ that can be used better for me anymore!
if someone had the expendable income, and or skills/equipment, the sky can be the limit, and if folks DIDN"T keep making custom things, we would never have what we all have now
I know a lot of folks frown on the crazy water riding deep mud , huge tire guys, but the amount of R&D they save OEM"S doing what they do, benefits us all in the long run, with having better designed and built OEM machine to buy
just look in the past say 5-6 yrs HOW far OEM"S have come with offering more BUILT atv's and UTV"S

IF it was UP to HONDA alone or other OEM"s, I think we would still be having LOW HP< plain jane machines
but its the custom builds that get sales and then the OEM"S that want there share back, so they BUILD things more built than ever before
HONDA sadly is the only one that that is still SLOW In moving forward, there still happy selling plain jane simple atv's and SxS's LOW HP< NOTHING wild or crazy HP for Honda, minus its indy cars and well, maybe super bikes LOL

 

[aTVitsnot]

I don’t understand your theory in wanting rising rate link design when the stock spring is already a rising rate design. The issues I see with the stock setup are damping, compression and rebound, all of which can be overcome by a good quality shock, or even two.
As we see in a lot of competitive motorsports nowadays folks have realised that damping is very necessary, hence a lot of off-road vehicles using two dampers per corner.
Stock 420 ranchers are a good candidate for this discussion, very softly sprung in the rear but a little under damped and lack slightly in rebound too however, for an SRA they are a comfortable ride for a stock ATV.

Edit: From my brief experiences with dirt bikes (MX) I believe the only reason for using the link design is to gain more travel and still being able to limit the size of the shock. Like most mono shock machines of today.

Solid axle ranchers are what they are and satisfy my needs for a 4 wheeler as they are. This is likely to remain simply a grey matter exercise.

I have always thought that linkage changes the leverage on the shock and varies the spring rate in a progressive manner that varied coil windings cant replicate. I have been wrong before and this may be yet another of those occasions.

 

[rodp]

Air suspension might be trick, and you could alter the rate of suspension by having smaller reservoirs that could be opened or closed. Or even just a variable restriction in the air feed pipe ?

 

[aTVitsnot]

Here is Dan Kyle on the subject of rising rate suspension;

Those interested in the subject will find clarity in his explanation...I think. Of course, I could be confused?

 

[SamUK]

Your not confused, your right. What we’re doing is trying to justify different reasons for its purpose and wether it’s good for an ATV or not.

Most springs on coil overs are not rising rate due to the small size of bike shocks, there just isn’t enough room to fit enough coils in such a small area. That is why the rising rate linkage works well.
My saying is, ATV’s generally have more room to fit bigger shocks, I know my 300 rear has a rising rate spring fitted to the rear shock from factory so no need for the linkage, I’d have the same affect and a much firmer ride.

Rising rate springs are identified by coils getting closer together toward the top of the spring.

 

[SamUK]

Air suspension might be trick, and you could alter the rate of suspension by having smaller reservoirs that could be opened or closed. Or even just a variable restriction in the air feed pipe ?

Air would be an interesting set up.

 

[misterclean59]

I don’t understand your theory in wanting rising rate link design when the stock spring is already a rising rate design. The issues I see with the stock setup are damping, compression and rebound, all of which can be overcome by a good quality shock, or even two.
As we see in a lot of competitive motorsports nowadays folks have realised that damping is very necessary, hence a lot of off-road vehicles using two dampers per corner.
Stock 420 ranchers are a good candidate for this discussion, very softly sprung in the rear but a little under damped and lack slightly in rebound too however, for an SRA they are a comfortable ride for a stock ATV.

Edit: From my brief experiences with dirt bikes (MX) I believe the only reason for using the link design is to gain more travel and still being able to limit the size of the shock. Like most mono shock machines of today.

Solid axle ranchers are what they are and satisfy my needs for a 4 wheeler as they are. This is likely to remain simply a grey matter exercise.

I have always thought that linkage changes the leverage on the shock and varies the spring rate in a progressive manner that varied coil windings cant replicate. I have been wrong before and this may be yet another of those occasions.

You are not wrong. The rising rate would change the dampening as well. It is a great idea for those of us who ride fast sometimes. It just wouldn't be worth the cost but it is fun to talk about.

 

[aTVitsnot]

I've never liked progressive springs. Having said that, my frame of reference is sport bike suspension. From this perspective, the big advantage straight rate springs have over progressively wound springs is in setting spring preload and ride height. Those elements are the foundation of a great handling chassis. You will play hell finding progressive springs in use on any modern sporty bike.

Now we consider the alternate reality of ATV suspension. I'm not unhappy with my suspension. It's working for the way I'm currently using it. People who are trail riding seem unhappy with the harsh ride delivered by the under damped and softly sprung suspension. I'm theorizing no one wants to jump doubles or skip every other whoops of an MX track with their solid axle Honda. Just more cush for the tush.

I believe linkage arms can answer this need with a lower quality shock. I believe a shock with quality compression and rebound adjustments will make a major improvement. I believe a progressive spring on the stock shock is a band aid without much of a sticky factor.

 

[aTVitsnot]

I had a moment to stare at my ranchers swingarm.

The upper shock mount/pivot could be moved forward if one were willing to fab a new airbox. Thats a lot of work for any benefit this mod would yield.

The lower mount could be moved rearward by fabricating lower linkage mounts which could be fastened to the same points used by the trailer hitch on my pumpkin. Not sure if that's a Genuine Honda accessory or not. This would not reduce ground clearance at all.

This orientation and resulting articulation would have a significant impact on leverage over the shock as the swingarm is compressed; enough to verify the linkage theoretical advantage any way.

Anyone have a spare swingarm, fab skills and enough curiosity to implement this experiment?

 

[SamUK]

What would give a good ride and be very impressive is a 4 link suspension set up on an SRA. As far as I know it’s not been done yet successfully, I spoke to a guy briefly who is big into lifts/paddles/reductions etc and word was that it had been attempted but didn’t get finished.
It would transform the ride of SRA ATVs for sure and a ‘weld on’ kit/conversion I should imagine would sell very well indeed.

 

[retro]

^^^^ I agree Sam, a 4-link could trump all other ATV SRA suspension designs and be completely adjustable.

 

[aTVitsnot]

That's what I'm talking about.

I'm not surprised to find that it had occurred to someone else.

My Rancher is a plow pusher and trailer tow-er. A work vehicle. Never thought about the 420's suspension performance until the 400 king quad vs 420 rancher thread. Wheels are turning though...

Source a shock and linkage from a dirt bike salvage yard. Prototype shock/linkage mounting brackets that maintain the stock ride height out of cardboard then plywood then 1/8th" steel. Prototype done!

Refinement stage likely would entail adjustments to linkage arms length, spring and damping rates.

There sure are a lot of SRA TRX's out there.

Anyone hear opportunity knocking?