Alternative impact 36" M-chassis a arm kit

niner · Dec 19, 2014

Just a pic comparing my buddies pro to my M. Got it out to valemont last weekend finally. 3' of fresh. Took me a little bit to get the hang of the new front end. But very happy with at by the end of the second day. It defiantly lays over easier than the pro, my buddy on the pro who had a M couldn't believe it. He said it felt like a 200 hp snowbike! Had a little problem with my xm shocks so stuffed my fox ones in for the weekend and have a guy lined up to shorten them next week.

kidwoo · Dec 19, 2014

niner said:
Took me a little bit to get the hang of the new front end.

Man, maybe it's a height thing....

But it took me about 20 seconds to get used to these a-arms. It's like the sled I've been riding in my imagination for the last 6 years.

I've overcorrected on some techy climbs once or twice but that's about it. I feel more connected to this sled than any other I've ridden. The narrower front end is 90% of that.

The pro for all its 'narrow body' stuff actually shows the difference next to your M in that pic.

Hey Alt! I think those pros need some 36" love too!

alt · Dec 19, 2014

kidwoo said:
Man, maybe it's a height thing....

But it took me about 20 seconds to get used to these a-arms. It's like the sled I've been riding in my imagination for the last 6 years.

I've overcorrected on some techy climbs once or twice but that's about it. I feel more connected to this sled than any other I've ridden. The narrower front end is 90% of that.

The pro for all its 'narrow body' stuff actually shows the difference next to your M in that pic.

Hey Alt! I think those pros need some 36" love too!

kid have your buddy jump on the web site. I have given them some as well. That kit has been selling very well. It's 36" with a sway bar option which I do recommend. Thanks guys great posts! These M arms are hard to keep in stock but I'm keeping a handful aside in case of carnage. Again thank you.
Dan

thefindian · Dec 20, 2014

Hey guys does anyone want to sell there stock A-arms? I have a 11 HCR that I want to narrow to the stock M
Thanks

Frostbite · Dec 20, 2014

That's great news guys, It's good to hear the A arms work so well. It sounds like the stock height on the front shocks are just too tall. I still have to get my Fox Floats shortened up once I order the A arms.

Do you guys still feel 16 1/2" is the optimal length for the front shocks or would maybe 16 1/4 or another measurement be even better?

I'm not sure how much length can be removed from the shocks and still have it function properly?

Thanks for the updates!

BradM8 · Dec 21, 2014

Has anyone measured how much lower the shorter arms drops the front end or are the losses minimal?

kidwoo · Dec 21, 2014

BradM8 said:
Has anyone measured how much lower the shorter arms drops the front end or are the losses minimal?

Why do you assume the front end drops?

The shorter shocks are for the width, since the shocks are angled.

backcountryislife · Dec 22, 2014

Exact opposite actually. Narrower arms with same shock will sit taller. if the math remains the same from the 43 to 40 jump, then a sled with 40" arms going to 36 should sit about 1.3" higher or so. (the 43-40 was a 1.75" bump)

It all depends on how much you shorten the shocks. I always liked my front end a little taller... but I haven't ridden this setup yet.

alt · Dec 23, 2014

Hey guys I need to clarify the shock situation. Most any shock will work at 16.5" although I now know if they have reservoirs they must be for an "m". They contact the plastic. I still learn something every day! Thank you.
Dan

K2 · Dec 23, 2014

My Raptors at full length ( before I shortened them to 16.5 ) made contact . Per Raptor's setup instructions I mounted the shocks, marked the contact point with a silver Sharpie, removed the shocks and hit the marked location with a heatgun then gave the location a shove with the handle end of a deadblow mallet - piece of cake .. :face-icon-small-hap

now alls we need is some freakin' snow ..

alt · Dec 23, 2014

Another good to know. Thanks rick! I didn't realize the raptors even for the M would touch. Boy I think with a remote a guy needs to be sure before making a huge purchase because I obviously don't have all the answers.
Dan

kidwoo · Dec 23, 2014

K2 said:
hit the marked location with a heatgun then gave the location a shove with the handle end of a deadblow mallet

SCIENCE!

It always wins.

Sinnful · Dec 24, 2014

Dan, Im the one that ordered some arms from you today( tuesday) that has the float evol's with res. so do you think all I have to do is heat up the plastic and massage it a lil bit to clear? if so, no big deal I'll run those shocks

alt · Dec 24, 2014

Sinnful said:
Dan, Im the one that ordered some arms from you today( tuesday) that has the float evol's with res. so do you think all I have to do is heat up the plastic and massage it a lil bit to clear? if so, no big deal I'll run those shocks

Hey Chris. With what we talked about and the caliber of shock I would put them on and sure give it a look see. I really have my doubts because the resi is on the outside but hey, it's worth a shot. Sorry guys that I'm just not up to to speed enough on chassis vrs shock on this one but the last thing I want to do is throw out false information about something I know squat about. I'm sure learning in a hurry. See to me resi shocks have just become a lot more common in the last several years more so on mountain sleds so the M being slightly before all this (not saying outdated by any means) you didn't run across this as much. I'm sure some will argue this but I'm just saying from my vantage point. Anyway Chris sure is worth thirty minutes to find out. Thank you!
Dan

BradM8 · Dec 24, 2014

kidwoo said:
Why do you assume the front end drops?

The shorter shocks are for the width, since the shocks are angled.

I understand the shorter shocks are because the geometry of the M longer shocks would not fit anymore. However if you kept the same angle of the a arms because they are not level I was thinking the sorter you go inward the lower the front of the sled starts becoming.

kidwoo · Dec 24, 2014

Ah. I see what you're saying now.

I think this is the key though.

BradM8 said:
if you kept the same angle of the a arms

I'm not sure they're the same angle at top out and sag. You have a shorter arc swing so the whole system is a little different. I haven't worked out the geometry or anything so I really don't know for sure if that one inch of shorter shock eye to eye actually does keep the same angle.

That said, I don't really notice my sled being any higher OR lower than before. I'm sure in reality it's one or the other, but not much.

kidrman · Dec 24, 2014

I think this would be affected as much by shock settings as length, assuming recommended length for a given arm width. More preload creating a taller stance.

K2 · Dec 24, 2014

kidwoo said:
SCIENCE!

It always wins.

Indeed -
the principle of altering the molecular structure of recycled milk jugz with heat .. :face-icon-small-hap .. and a BFH ..

1Mike900 · Dec 24, 2014

With the narrower stance by an inch or so, the 16.5" shocks will be at a more up/down angle, thus not much change in height with the same sag if both being equal? I bet 16-5/8 would be spot on or about 1/2 to 3/4" higher than stock?

Mike

kidwoo · Dec 24, 2014

K2 said:
Indeed -
the principle of altering the molecular structure of recycled milk jugz with heat .. :face-icon-small-hap

I was thinking of the ball peen certainty principle, which states that if a hammer is used, that's science™ at work.

Alternative impact 36" M-chassis a arm kit

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads