• 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.

Effects of snowbike ride height/clearance adjustments

Chadx

♫ In the pow again. Just can't wait to get in..
Lifetime Membership
Feb 2, 2010
718
521
93
Bozeman, MT
Wanted to start a thread to explore the effects of adjusting snowbike ride height; pros and cons. Seems more riders are making efforts to adjust ride height outside the norm (typically lower) and some interesting information is coming of it. Curious about not only the benefits of such changes, but also the negative effects; minor or not. Thought it would be helpful for those making these changes to share what they found for the benefit of the masses. Some people like to experiment and tinker...Some of us just like to hear their stories. Ha.

All kits have the ability to make some adjustments to find the sweet spot for track contact patch (which effects ski pressure and handling dramatically). Strut lengths are adjustable to set the angle of the track to reach that sweet spot. That is typically with the front of the track contacting before the rear of the track. Meaning, rear track rails are slightly further from the ground than the front of the track rails. Once the sweet spot/angle is found, some folks wank to adjust the overall bike height. That is usually lowering it by moving fork tubes higher in the triple clamp or fork internals are modified to have lower ride height. This then requires the strut length to be adjusted again to correct the bike-to-track angle and get the track contact patch/ski pressure back to the sweet spot. In more radical cases of lowering the front of the bike, the adjustability of the snowbike strut is surpassed. Some have machined parts to allow additional adjustment. Some snowbike kits, such as Yeti, also give the user three tunnel mounting positions for the track and suspension allowing further tailoring (higher or lower than stock).

While keeping the same contact patch/ski pressure/bike-to-kit angle (the sweet spot) the same, there are a couple obvious benefits to a lower bike height such as lower center of gravity and easier/lower seat height. Possible cons include a lower ride height causing more drag in deep snow, hard carving or steep sidehills (considering not only the engine/skidplate are lower but footpegs and feet/shins are dragging deeper in the snow which can add a fair bit of resistance in deep snow or clearance issues on steep sidehills). Also, lower skidplate height and footpeg height may mean more contact with hidden obstacles (stumps and rocks) with not only the bike, but with your feet. Ouch. Sleds keep going taller and taller for various reasons such as less paneling on steep sidehills and less body contacting snow in the deep. Different designs, but perhaps share some the the effects of chassis being higher or lower compared to ski and track.

On dirtbikes and dual sports, I have never minded the towering seat heights and focused on standing and keeping my feet on the pegs in challenging terrain rather than sitting and dabbing my feet. Over the last 6 or 7 years of snowbiking, unlike when I ride snowmobiles, I tend to sit rather than stand for the majority of terrain so this fact, and several riders in this forum mentioning their adjusting ride height, has me thinking about the subject.

It is likely the weight of each pro and each con will depend on personal riding style, snow depths, snow consistency, etc. so most interested in discussions about the mechanics and physics of raising or lowering snowbike ride height, but also interested in the how to, why you chose to do it, what you expected before doing it, if the results were what you expected, any surprise discoveries you had not expected (good or bad), etc.
 
Last edited:
B
Nov 29, 2018
69
37
18
And: do you need to lean a lower center of gravity machine more than a higher center of gravity machine to go around the same turn. For motos with wheels I believe a lower center of gravity machine needs to lean more than a higher center of gravity machine. I believe a lot of things though.
 

Revv Up

Well-known member
Lifetime Membership
Nov 26, 2011
292
121
43
Revelstoke BC
www.revvup.net
Interesting as my inseam is challenged, I’ve gone from a 2015 Timbersled to an ARO which has moved the seat height up by at least 3” which has me very concerned.
 

CATSLEDMAN1

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 27, 2007
2,630
1,207
113
75
Missoula, Montana
I dropped my 2013 KTM 500 3" in the forks and shock to make it a more enjoyable dual sport bike. Then when I put it back to sno bike status 3 years ago I thought the lowered forks would be a screw up................nope. Standing back and looking at the bike out in the snow no body would know. Everybody that hops on it can't say why, but it handles so comfortably, doesn't feel like your perched up on a high horse, very agile feel, not fussy about ruts and junk roads. Now with my RIOT kit, if there is a downside I don't know it.

Cutting viscous side hills, what? Deeeep snow, what, I follow the path of my ski. With my slick plastic engine covers there is vary little drag in handlebar deep snow.

So, that's my story.
 
A
Nov 14, 2017
266
159
43
What my group has discovered is that moving the forks up and down in the triple clamps can make a big difference in handling, especially on the trail (hardpack). It also makes a noticable difference to handling in the deep stuff as well, just not as obvious.

It seems that pushing the ski lower will create more ski pressure, and sliding them up relieves it. From what I can tell, every bike and kit combo have a different sweet spot. Some guys seem to have their forks way up there like CatsledMan, 3". I personally have mine just about an inch and a quarter and it handles amazing on the trail and in the pow.

This is a very easy adjustment to make out there during a ride, especially sliding them higher in the clamps. Play with it and you will notice a big difference.
 

Chadx

♫ In the pow again. Just can't wait to get in..
Lifetime Membership
Feb 2, 2010
718
521
93
Bozeman, MT
Castleman,
With your forks setup 3" shorter than stock height, how did you choose your strut length? I'm not familiar with how other brands recommend the owner adjust the angle of the track (by adjusting the strut length). For Yeti, they make recommendations depending on what the owner prefers (better trail stability plus better deep snow performance, then adjust the rails somewhere between flat (same front to back) and .25" higher in the back. More agile turning but more skittish on the trail, then the rear of the rails higher than the front of the rails from .5" to .75").

Are you saying you used the same strut length you would have for a bike with normal height front forks and are effectively leaning the bike forward so more weight on the front of the track and less weight on the rear of the track and ski? Or, with the front so low, did you adjust the strut length to set the track rails to an angle similar to what it would have been if not using a lower fork?

AllHat,
I agree that adjusting the forks is a quick and easy way to adjust the tracks contact patch (front to back weight bias) which definitely changes the feel of any given kit; how it weights the ski, handles on trail, turns, and floats in deep powder. Adjusting the fork height is definitely faster than adjusting the strut length on most kits. What my first post in this thread is talking about is a bit different.

What I'm curious about is, once the sweet spot is found, then lowering the entire bike in relationship to the ground and so not changing the angle or contact patch from the sweet spot. Basically, deciding on a sweet spot for track contact for ones kit (the angle of the kit in relationship to the bike), then lowering or raising the entire bike in relation to the kit, keeping the same angle/same track contact patch and ski pressure.

Say ones forks are set flush with the top of the triple clamp and the rear rail is set .5" higher than the front of the rail because that is the sweet spot for a specific bikes bike-to-kit angle. Then, moving the entire bike lower but preserving the same angle; for example, pushing the forks 1.5" up in the triple clamps and then adjusting the strut length to again set the rear rail .5" higher than the front of the rail. That keeps the track contact patch identical, ski pressure identical, but just lowers the seat height and center of gravity. The bike loses ground clearance and rides lower in the snow. What are pros and cons of the bike riding lower overall height (but still adjusted to the same sweet spot). I'll update my original post to clarify that a bit. Interesting stuff!
 
Last edited:
E
Dec 19, 2007
1,040
657
113
52
I've been testing super low set ups and the drag isn't a big problem but rock damage to the drive axle and front side panels is much more likely. So instead of just shortening the strut I've been shortening the spindle (custom) and or sliding forks way up with rox riser so they don't hit the bars. Then I hack my subframe to lower the seat. This makes the seat to peg real tight but I'm inseam challenged. The riot/aro have the highest axles but also sit the highest if set by the book.
If you do any extreme fork sliding or strut lowering watch what it does to the fork angle, the fork gets steeper when the front of the bike goes down so you will start to loose the heal pressure on the ski from the rubber bumper. I've had to shim the rear ski bumper to fix it from weighting the front of the ski too much.
 

CATSLEDMAN1

Well-known member
Premium Member
Nov 27, 2007
2,630
1,207
113
75
Missoula, Montana
I shortened my fork length or dropped my forks by putting a spacer in my forks , so they sit flush to top of triple clamps while the forks are shorter. When I installed my RIOT kit, with the kit installed, I adjusted my strut so with ski and track on the garage floor the track is as parallel as possible to the floor. So far I have not felt a need to adjust further, waiting for other snow conditions to judge whats going on. So far on rutted low snow roads, its good as I remember on last years setup. I know my strut length is shorter than my riding partners ktm450 stock fork length. When we were building our first sno bikes and struggling to find fair road manners, it became apparent that MX fork angles and ENDURO fork angles play a part in making the ski " trail". With a raked out more enduro fork angle, we found it was importand to run more trail/caster in the ski mounting point. Ski mounting point on my YZ250, ski bolt 1.250 inches behind axle center worked, WR450 I had to run 2.50" ski bolt behind axle. I was again ready to make similar adjustments when the ARO SKI/SPINDLE CAME along and I bought that setup as soon as available.
I have run ARO/now RIOT stock spindle and ski in stock position and feels good, I should try other postitions, as RACE TECH says, what you have is as good as you know unless you try something better.
 
Premium Features