pics of the Diamond J Customs kit off a quad

[blaster199]

not trying to stir up trouble but when i was rebuilding my quad to race flat track i thought about going with the cheap kit and not spending several hundreds of dollars on a-arms but i talked to a guy that has been racing for years with the kit you dont get the roll over effect like you would with a-arms the a-arms are build to be used that way where i dont see the kit being build for that if you dont race every weekend and just joy ride then yeah the kit is for you but if your gonna race i would save your money for some a-arms cause in racing suspension is your bestfriend you can have all the money you want in a motor but if you cant handel it or have control over your bike your not winning iv watched guys at my track spend all the money in the world on a motor and are getting beat by my blaster cause they dont have the right suspension as for the kit being junk i cant say much because iv never owned one but after having the 4+1+ a-arms i will never own a quad with out a set like someone said before me buy it try it out if you like it keep it fine if you dont im sure someone else would love to have it just be happy with whatever you do to your blaster

 

[370]

+4 arms??????

f*cking 15

 

[BlasterAzores]

... if you dont race every weekend and just joy ride then yeah the kit is for you but if your gonna race i would save your money for some a-arms... ...like someone said before me buy it try it out if you like it keep it fine if you dont im sure someone else would love to have it just be happy with whatever you do to your blaster

Could not agree more.... 100% my point of view

 

[blaster199]

yup they are burgard +4 a-arms bought them used right here on blaster forum

 

[370]

damn i didn't even know they made +4 arms for a blaster.. i bet the spring rates and valving on those front shocks was tricky for whoever set them up..

 

[Blasterdude27]

damn i didn't even know they made +4 arms for a blaster....

Yep sms even makes +5's.

 

[blaster199]

lol im running stockers with the a-arms they work just fine

 

[blasterdude]

I agree with you i would flip my wheels before i did something like that...

 

[370]

lol im running stockers with the a-arms they work just fine

try it with the right shocks.. you might be surprised..

 

[blaster199]

i would love to try some elka or works but i dont have 1200 to try the right shocks

 

[masterblaster81]

and what is a C&C machine? i think you mean a CNC.. unfourtunatley they don't make bends in steel.. they cut according to a specific job programed into them.. those BULLSHIT plates wouldn't be a job for a cnc...

I'm an operations manager at a metal fabrication shop, and yes a cnc machine will bend steel.... its called a press brake

 

[370]

i think i said a few pages back that i was mistaken about the cnc brake.. that doesn't change the fact that these kits are CRAP!!!!

 

[samolia]

i think i said a few pages back that i was mistaken about the cnc brake.. that doesn't change the fact that these kits are CRAP!!!!

did you have a bad experience once with this kit or something???
everyone who gets the kit seems to like it alot.

in my opinion the diamond j kit is 10x better then wheel spacers on the front

 

[370]

diamond J kit or wheel spacers are both bad ideas for a front suspension.. flattrack guys do you 1 front spacer sometime to set up thier offset.. but that quad is never jumped..


it's not that i had a bad experiance with that kit.. all it takes is a little suspension and handling knowledge and you'll see it's junk... it doesn't make a quad handle better. it make it handle WORSE.. read back a few pages and you'll see the reasons i;ve posted.. those are all valid reasons.... the best handlign quads in teh world use a thin front frame section and a LONG a arm.. utility quads use a wide fornt frame sction and short arms.. liek a bayou220... is that a good handlign quad? a nimble quad? NO!!!! are 4x4 quads nimble machines??? NO!!!! my point exactly.. and your changing the pivot point of the a arms but not the tie rod.. thats BAD!!!

 

[samolia]

diamond J kit or wheel spacers are both bad ideas for a front suspension.. flattrack guys do you 1 front spacer sometime to set up thier offset.. but that quad is never jumped..


it's not that i had a bad experiance with that kit.. all it takes is a little suspension and handling knowledge and you'll see it's junk... it doesn't make a quad handle better. it make it handle WORSE.. read back a few pages and you'll see the reasons i;ve posted.. those are all valid reasons.... the best handlign quads in teh world use a thin front frame section and a LONG a arm.. utility quads use a wide fornt frame sction and short arms.. liek a bayou220... is that a good handlign quad? a nimble quad? NO!!!! are 4x4 quads nimble machines??? NO!!!! my point exactly.. and your changing the pivot point of the a arms but not the tie rod.. thats BAD!!!

the kit doesnt change the suspension geometry it moves everything out at an equal distance so the geometry is the same crappy design as a stock blasters, people dont bolt this system on to get a blaster that handles like a 250r they want to get a machine that is more stable in the turns and doesnt feel like its ganna flip over everytime you try to turn at speed..
now the tie rods have nothing to do with it at all because then you put longer a-arms on your makeing the tie rod longer anyways and it still moves the same so thats not much of an argument there..
if someone wanted the best handling quad in the world they would of never even gave a blaster a second look..
and thats a very bad excuse using a utility quad as an example of nimble ness when they weigh more then twice as much as a blaster....

 

[NOVIS]

the kit doesnt change the suspension geometry it moves everything out at an equal distance so the geometry is the same crappy design as a stock blasters, people dont bolt this system on to get a blaster that handles like a 250r they want to get a machine that is more stable in the turns and doesnt feel like its ganna flip over everytime you try to turn at speed..
now the tie rods have nothing to do with it at all because then you put longer a-arms on your makeing the tie rod longer anyways and it still moves the same so thats not much of an argument there..
if someone wanted the best handling quad in the world they would of never even gave a blaster a second look..
and thats a very bad excuse using a utility quad as an example of nimble ness when they weigh more then twice as much as a blaster....

+1....................................

 

[ROCKSTAR]

-2 the both of you have no idea what you are talking about. it completly changes the front geometry, and the tie rod angle does matter. so does the front frame section width.

you want wider, more stability, fine that will do it. THATS IT. other than that, its f*cking junk

 

[samolia]

-2 the both of you have no idea what you are talking about. it completly changes the front geometry, and the tie rod angle does matter. so does the front frame section width.

you want wider, more stability, fine that will do it. THATS IT. other than that, its f*cking junk

great you dont like the kit, but the only thing the kit does is move the a-arms farther out but it still does not improve yamaha's sh*tty suspension design...
you did say 1 thing correct tho the tie rod angle is important and the kit does change it..
the tie rod angle matters because if the angle is to great then there are binding issues but this kit makes the tie rods longer which decreases the tie rod angle which is what you want.

 

[yamahaman126]

I was just checking out the pics on their website. These things scare me. If they were gusseted like the frame it probably wouldn't bother me. I have only saw these on one Blaster in person. They just look like if they take a hard lick to one of the wheels that they will bend since they aren't supported. I'm sure someone can come up with a little better design. These things are $180 on there site, why not just put that back and save a little more and get +2+1 arms. Just seems safer to me.

 

[ROCKSTAR]

I was just checking out the pics on their website. These things scare me. If they were gusseted like the frame it probably wouldn't bother me. I have only saw these on one Blaster in person. They just look like if they take a hard lick to one of the wheels that they will bend since they aren't supported. I'm sure someone can come up with a little better design. These things are $180 on there site, why not just put that back and save a little more and get +2+1 arms. Just seems safer to me.

exactly. much safer, and better...