1989 Blaster larger than the 2000 and 2003.
- Thread starter abaughman83
- Start date
Something don't look right with the A arms? They look stock! BUT on the bottom arms, the tubing between the frame mount and shock mount looks longer and bent?
Something don't look right with the A arms? They look stock! BUT on the bottom arms, the tubing between the frame mount and shock mount looks longer and bent?
So went out and measured it and it is wider then the stock blaster. First two are the red one and the 3rd pic is a stock blaster.
Just by comparing the two pics i can see that the arms are longer. Can we get a closeup of the bottom A arms?
The welds that hold the A arm tubing to the A arm pivot tube look to smooth. The factory welds are never that smooth! lol
On the bottom arm the section between the pivots and the beginning of the bracing for the shock mount look longer then stock.
On the bottom arm the section between the pivots and the beginning of the bracing for the shock mount look longer then stock.
The rear shock looks to be an Ohlins << great shock if it is. Can you measure from the mounting bolt where the a arms mount to the frame to the ball joint,? Both upper and lower. Rims are prob flipped as stated, or a different offset...The a arms do look longer but it maybe an illusion? Cut fenders, flipped rims, shorter shocks will deff make it a bit wider.. As fast6hand stated,, be carefull with that rear swing arm , look close for cracks etc..
BTW, Welcome .
BTW, Welcome .
...... They look very stock looking but there definitely longer than stock a arms..
i think they are banshee lower a arms with stock blaster uppers or maybe modified banshee uppers but they are missing the brake line tabs?.I think I saw someone in a magazine back in the day put banshee j arms on the blaster and they said the lower arms were a direct bolt on? but they had to make something for the j arm to fit.
http://www.macdizzy.com/yfsyz4.htm
I found the article they say they used blaster lower arms and banshee uppers but from the pic you can tell the lowers are way longer then stock blaster
http://www.macdizzy.com/yfsyz4.htm
I found the article they say they used blaster lower arms and banshee uppers but from the pic you can tell the lowers are way longer then stock blaster
Hugeee mystery on those a-atms. Im interested in the puzzle lol... Way to stock looking. Yet extended
Someone on here a while back swore warrior a arms bolted right up, and they had them on their blaster. Maybe?
I have a warrior too I can look and measure those to see if they are the same size. Think they are all getting pulled out today. Step son has been bugging me all week to go out.
Actually I think they only put time into it. The swinger like that is dangerous and only the cost of a little plate steel ($5 maybe)
The a-arms are definitely bent, so I would look into replacing those as well.
As for your idle it could be a number of things. have you guys gotten to cleaning the carb yet?
Similar threads
