• Don't miss out on all the fun! Register on our forums to post and have added features! Membership levels include a FREE membership tier.

Mountaintech A Arms for Nytro MTX

Mountaintech

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 27, 2007
1,322
316
83
Bend OR
Figured it was time to start a separate thread for these. I just finished the latest set. I had the opportunity to start experimenting with front end geometry early last season and came up with a combo I was very happy with by the end of the season. The latest set is basically a refined version of last years. The geometry is the same. Here were my design goals.

1. Determine the optimum "forward" dimension.
2. Permit use of stock shocks.
3. Independently adjustable camber and CASTER.
4. Use of stock spindle.
5. Weight savings over stock.

All goals were met. A dimension of +3" forward was determined to be the sweet spot. Going further forward does not improve overall performance, it just creates more problems. Stock shocks work great with no funky angles at the mounting brackets. No swivel rod end shock mods required. Camber and caster are separately adjustable, and the caster has alot of adjustment to compensate for slightly tweaked subframes. Stock spindle geometry is improved with an added spacer and there is a weight savings.

000_0001.jpg 000_0002.jpg 000_0004.jpg
 

christopher

Well-known member
Staff member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 1, 2008
81,512
27,373
113
Rigby, Idaho
1. Determine the optimum "forward" dimension.
2. Permit use of stock shocks.
3. Independently adjustable camber and CASTER.
4. Use of stock spindle.
5. Weight savings over stock.

All goals were met.
Do any other A-Arms on the market allow for this?
 

Mountaintech

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 27, 2007
1,322
316
83
Bend OR
Not that I am aware of. Proper caster is crucial for proper deep snow handling on the Nytro. Measure your sled and tell what you have on each side.
 
B

BigFish BC

Well-known member
Jan 27, 2005
3,348
1,139
113
kitimat b.c
how wide did you settle on,iam guessing you have built a jig for making them?so if i wanted a 37 inch set it would be tough to do.they look a little funky but if they work no biggy:face-icon-small-coo
 

motojunkie101

MODERATOR: Premium Member
Staff member
Premium Member
Nov 26, 2007
2,281
805
113
40
Sandpoint, Idaho
I'm suddenly regretting selling my old front end parts after I installed my timbersled arms. Being adjustable would be perfect for folks like me with a weak subframe that isn't quite square anymore.

Also I'm too cheap to buy new shocks, so that is a huge bonus too.
 

Mountaintech

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 27, 2007
1,322
316
83
Bend OR
I believe that Skins put some more caster in there kit did they not? I am not sure how much. Any ideas on what the ideal caster for mountain riding should be?

Hats off to Skinz for being one of the pioneers of the "forward" concepts. Their kit is not adjustable for caster. You get whatever their arms and your subframe allow. You want at least 22-23 degrees. Less than that and your deep snow performance will suffer.
 
K
May 9, 2013
62
25
18
Beside you personally riding your own "test" arms? Who else has ridden or tested your kit? What kind of feedback have you gotten from them? What kind of real world testing has been done? I'd think some third party feedback would be in order before going into production.
Suspension components are a whole lot different that vent kits and gauge pod accessories.
I find that "your" arms also look eerily similar to the ones you spent last year blasting.
What I find the most odd is your trying to resolve a bent subframe issue by making arms with adjustable caster. Theres a guy on TY who sells a reinforcement kit for subframes that works great. You might want to have a look at that.
 
S
Nov 23, 2013
8
0
1
Nelson BC
It's not that important to have absolutely precise caster for riding in powder. Sure you want the caster to be in the right range but having it infinitely adjustable is not necessary. For the Nytro you could just do it like the Zbroz kit does by shimming the upper a-arms forward or backwards.

Also, I've built a lot of tubular frames over the years and I don't like how the upper a-arm supports the top of the spindle on this front end kit. Most of the force on the a-arm is perpendicular to the sled so the a-arm is much more structurally sound if it is also perpendicular to the sled. This upper a-arm is parallel to the sled where the ball joint bolts to the spindle which makes it more prone to bending under high lateral forces as would be experienced in side-hilling. If it was chromoly I'd have a little more faith in it but the DOM tubing will likely bend unless its 120 wall (in which case it would be excessively heavy). IMO it's not worth having a weaker upper a-arm to have infinitely adjustable caster. Has has anyone tested this a-arm kit and put it through its paces?
 
B

BigFish BC

Well-known member
Jan 27, 2005
3,348
1,139
113
kitimat b.c
strange how 2 peps with no posts jumped on this thread, iam not defending him just funny thats all.anyway if you had been on snowest in the last year reading a-arm threads he has answered this befor & iam sure he will again.
 
Premium Features