1998 to 2000 rear skid adjustment

in pic 1 i am seeing a small backing plate just behind the steering hoop. i am assuming what i am seeing in 14 and 15 is the same mounting point for the front arm on the parts sled. are these measures the same between the two sleds and am i seeing what i think i am seeing in pic 1? take it from there.

what i am seeing in the diffferent approach angles between the sleds is a sled without the front end attached, the rear end raised considerably, and the front of the skid compressed. in my opinion, if you stripped the front end off your sled, raised the rear end, and compress the front of the skid, you may duplicate the appearance of a reduced angle. just a perspective and observation from pictures, your there, i am not.

also, from perspective through pictures, it would appear as though the rails on the parts skid dont appear to have as much bend at the front as the welded rails appear. for comparison, a 2000 and up rail set would appear similar to your parts sled while the 97-99 rails more so emulate the current sled.

as for the spring, strap, and associated parts, if the shocks were the same length and all else being equal such as the front arm and misc, could be just the way it was adjusted and one could have heavier duty springs. it wouldnt affect your install if all the associated parts were compatable. now if one skid had long travel parts and the other had short travel, it would still probably go in but your suspension wouldnt properly cycle. i am dealing with alot of unknowns as are you.
 
Does the elkholm tunnel have a more aggressive taper? Those drop brackets seem to be leaving the skid hanging out in deep space compared to a stock tunnel mountain sled. Do yourself a favor and put the axle back together with the skid on the floor. You will drive yourself crazy trying to get the washers and everything else all aligned to get the axle in, done that myself. The rails appear to be pre-2000 geometry trail rails judging on the bends and lenght forward of the mount. The old style w-arm was a bit of a giveaway too.

This is my skid from last winter when I pulled it to put in the 2 wheel axle kit. I have since reverted to stock front idler mounts since the combo rsi/scratcher mounts were a big fail. They don't have enough support and I put a little bend into the left rail and bent the bolt.

Anyways, look at the difference between the front w arm setup with the limiters going up over the front, and length and curve in the front part of the skid. You may find the need for anti stabs with the short curved rails at some point.
 

Attachments

  • 141 skid.jpg
    141 skid.jpg
    176.5 KB · Views: 8
Last edited:
At least I know I was nowhere close now! Jeez I'm terrible sorry for the mis information.

The front mounting points do appear the same I'm not home now so I will measure tonight but they do look close. So is there even a way I can update to 2000 and up? Like I had said the skids were set up totally different and I don't know what's right and what's wrong. I could use my template now that I have it figured and put the mounts where it shows me is this a good idea or no?

I would like to keep my current skid because everything on it is in a lot better shape than the parts skid. Everything between the two measures out correctly the only discrepancy is the arms that run with the rear shock, on my skid they are about 1/4" longer than the parts skid. After hours of measuring and comparin that is the ony different I can find measurement wise.

Where should I start? Use the front mount hole as a reference then carry on with the template? I just don't know enough to figure out why they were two different set ups. How do I tell if I have long travel shocks or not?


I forgt to mention during this process of all these pictures I also stripped my
Seat down and took 6" out of the middle of it.

Here are some more pics

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gplm2lbupxmh1z5/X1rsjkBPht
 
Last edited:
the measurements for the front mount holes behind steering hoop are the same. I took some more pics of the skids beside each other, the kick up at the front of the rail is the same on both.

I found I went off the wrong hole on my template but I figured out how now the measurements add up from my parts sled. I bolted the front mount up and clamped the back, I took some more pictures of it in place with the top of the wood template parallel with the tunnel at the top. You can see where the mount holes should be (to match the parts sleds set up) the old brackets that came off my sled will not work for the back holes (according to this template)

Now I just want to verify that this will work before I do all this again!!
I appreciate the help it's much needed!
 
can you be more specific as to what arms are longer?

lets review a few things just to be clear. on the parts sled, did you ever see that thing up and running or was it just tossed in with the deal? it almost appears to me as though someone simply hodgepodged the skid in there to make it appear complete. is this a possibility? the extra holes could be related to a skid that someone didnt want to spend time putting back in. the inconsistent part of the equation is the track length and rail length.

in my experience, if the front arm is mounted the same distance from the drive shaft, nothing has been compensated for in relation to the track length. since both share the same front mount points, it would appear as the compensation from 136 to 144 has been achieved. as that point moves back from the original mount forward of the hoop, each of the other mounts must move back incrementally as well as down slightly. i can see in the pictures where at one time these holes were moved similar distances, including the rear drops pictured on your parts sled. basic math for relocates not factoring in driver size.

what happens with the 136-141 conversion is the math puts the front mount in the steering hoop. yours having the drop and roll equates things back enough to clear this thus the location same as your parts sled. someone went back 136-144 thus clearing the hoop.

there were alot of hit and miss theories and lots of ideas as to how to make those skids work better. could be the extra movement at center and rear made for a better ride or even better yet transfer, dont know. not how i did things, but if it works, i am open.
 
As far as I know it was up n running, had a big bore motor, blew it up an that's the last it ran. This sled was assembled entirely except for the motor. But tht doesn't mean it was correct. I did get a hold of him lastnight and he said the parts sled was a short track converted to long track but doesn't know sizes (he did say he had a mechanic do it all but who knows)
It is a possibility that it was thrown together. I lean the other way but it very well could have been.

Measure rail length from tip of the kick up at the front to far back side 55 1/8" on my sled and the parts sled was 53"

When a drop n roll chain case get done do you just have to tighten track or how does it work?

I did at one point have my parts sled with skis on it and that's when I starting digging. I eyed it up roughly with an angle finder (don't know these angles) but it was a lower angle on my parts sled I remember it being significant though.

I now know better when I take stuff apart and throw it out.
 
go with your instincts. it wont take long to find out. i would more so temp things up then fully commit until your sure. (center and rear mounts)

depending on the drop and roll kit and how much it moves determines what needs to be done. sometimes its a track adjustment, sometimes its a skid relocate. done it both ways.

i think originally, short of the rail welding, your original was more like a kit type install. i am guessing the parts sled is more a one off and i dont mean that negative. it appears as though it started as a kit style perhaps and then reworked from there. curious as to the outcome when your finished.

was that a straight line measure on your rails?
 
It might be time to call Hartman and get some help with this before you turn that nice tunnel into Swiss cheese. If your other skid has bolt on extensions, he can provide templates for proper setback, you could remove your extensions and get the improved geometry from the setback. If it turns out the donor skid is a long travel, you can swap parts, use its linkage ect with your old rails to make a long travel with proper setback to go 136-144 and get the post-2000 geometry out of it.
 
Before when I had mentioned the arms being a different length (the bars I speak of run parallel to the rear shock they just pivot and are made out of 3/4" x 1/8" flat steel they seem to just be a guide not a support point.

Yes it was a straight line measure on the rails I measured the same way for both rails, so is it possible to achieve 2000 and up with what I have to work with now ?

Maybe I will try to get in touch with hartman
 
Those flat parallel bars are what stroke the rear shock when the suspension is compressed. The center to center on the rear and center mount are important because of this. Yamaha's thought was unsprung weight and less for snow to build up on. Look at a timbersled skid. They run a pogo type geometry on both mounts and are uncoupled. It might be time to watch the yamaha pro action tuning video, that will give you a better idea how it is designed to work, and help you figure out where everything needs to be.
 
This is what I've came up wit so far just temp installed. This is what it should have been the first time. Still unsure about it being right what do you guys think. The rear angles look good I think but I'm unsure about the Center mount is the whole bracket suppose to be vertical?
 
thats looking much better. i would have to reference one of my sleds on that center pivot if no one else chimes in.

i would suggest before committing that you get the rear axle in there and see where your at on the track length.
 
Okay sounds good, I'm basically at a stand still with the back I am gonna have to try to find another sled to reference. Does anyone have a good way to compress the rear shock? Do I need to compress it to get it in? Right now there's no rear shock I pulled it just to make it easy.
Basically all I need I THINK is a rough angle that Center mount pivot should be at it seems to far forward but I'm in sure

Thanks again!
 
Can anyone else help me out with this... I gotta be pretty close just need a nudge in the right direction. I searched all day for someone who has a comparable sled and no luck. There is one for sale on kijiji I might have to go look at to reference haha
 
one is near vertical, two are slightly forward of center. i would say more so than what your showing. all of mine have transfer straps, no rods. i dont think its a deal killer, could be just the way they are sitting.

i think in your case i would button things up and give her a ride on the shop floor. if it aint binding and not too stiff, hopefully your good to go.
 
Alright well this is what I came up with
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gplm2lbupxmh1z5/X1rsjkBPht
I am mainly guessing here but I think I have it close. The back holes I moved up about 7/8" and the middle mount point bracket is near vertical, sleds suspension cycles like I think it should so I'm going with it.
The rear axle is near max length back but it does have a little wiggle room in case it lossens up on me.

I hope this works now, I am going to ride it for the first time in the morning And well see how it does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


Back
Top