78 Cyclone Rear Suspension info please?

[Liquifire 4/6]

During the last couple months, I've been working on a 78 Cyclone that I re-powered with a 488 Indy Trail engine. I haven't restored the sled to pristine condition yet but have instead just gone through it very thoroughly to ensure it is a reliable machine. I went completely through the rear suspension making sure all the pivot shafts turned freely and that all bearings were good. Nothing bent or busted in it anywhere and it looks like the suspension should work perfectly.

But, it seems to sit awfully low in the rear end. Maybe that's just the way these things were? With the sled raised on a stand, the rear end of the suspension still sits well up in the tunnel while the front portion of the suspension seems to stick out of the chassis the way one would expect it to. This is the only 78 Cyclone I've ever seen up close and I know the rear suspension in the 1978 models were unlike any other years. Did I do something wrong or is it just normal for that year?

I'l attach a picture showing it up on the stand but it's a bit hard to see. If there are any tips or suggestions anyone can give me on the 1978 suspensions, please let me know. Also, has anyone lowered the mounting point for the rear torque arm below the stock position? If you did, did you also have to lower the mounting point for the front torque arm?

[Liquifire 4/6]

Just thought I might as well post a few of pictures on the engine installation. We only have an inch of snow here so my testing thus far has been limited to a couple of short runs on the lawn but I have to say, this thing really seems to scoot along!

[ihengineer76]

Is the rear shock factory? It looks like it isn't fully extended or is too short. Can you manually extend the suspension any further?

[Liquifire 4/6]

Is the rear shock factory? It looks like it isn't fully extended or is too short. Can you manually extend the suspension any further?

As far as I can tell, it is the correct shock and it operated smoothly and travelled it's full range when I had it removed from the suspension. It is stamped AM 54601 Gabriel and when I looked at the John Deere parts site, that is the part number it calls for on the 1978 Cyclone. Something just doesn't seem right with the way it looks. And no, I can't seem to manually extend the suspension any further. I'll post a pic of the rear torque arm in case anyone can figure out what's wrong based on that.

The springs do seem to be under a fair bit of tension with the sled just sitting there with zero weight on the seat.

[AirborneX4Special]

When you push it downward manually does it return to where it is in the picture, or is the picture showing full extension of travel? It just seems a bit compressed, as if the machine were on the ground with someone sitting on it for a photo op. I have seen worn out shocks fail to hold the suspension at full extension with no load.

[Liquifire 4/6]

The picture is showing it at what seems to be it's full limit of travel. My brother has a 77 Cyclone with the older style suspension which I would assume should have less travel. But this 78 seems to have less travel than his 77? I am going to yank the suspension back out of the sled tomorrow and take a closer look at it on the bench. Maybe I can post some pictures of it on the bench so that you guys can hopefully see if I assembled something incorrectly. And thanks for the input, guys!

[fast823]

Anymore info on motor swap? I am saving a cyclone chassis to do same. I was hoping to just put in the older Polaris suspension at same time.

[Liquifire 4/6]

I ended up removing the rear suspension from the sled last night and I could see no way that I could have erred in it's assembly or installation. Everything seemed to operate the way it should. This morning, I downladed a manual and took a look at the section pertaining to the rear suspension of the 1978 models. The picture they show of the suspension installed in the sled looks identical to the way mine looks. The rear portion of the skid appears to be tucked too high up into the tunnel while the front portion of the suspension hangs down lower the same way as mine does. So it seems there is nothing wrong with my suspension. It just doesn't look right to me and I am seriously considering making a new lower mounting point for the rear torque arm.

The new hole would have to be below the running board as there is not enough space to drill a new hole below the existing hole since it is only about an inch above the running board. That would put the new rear hole almost 2" lower than the stock rear hole. Would I need to also lower the front hole? And if so, would I need to go the same 2" lower or would it only need to be lowered slightly from stock? Some of you have likely lowered rear skids on these sleds so any opinions would be appreciated. My main concern would be that I not put any undue stresses on the track. Here's a pic from the manual showing the stock set-up

[Liquifire 4/6]

Anymore info on motor swap? I am saving a cyclone chassis to do same. I was hoping to just put in the older Polaris suspension at same time.

Might be best if I just start a new thread on the motor swap. Not sure if I'll have time today but I'll try

[harleysportster]

Pm me your email and I'll send some pictures of my stock 78 cyclone suspension.

[Liquifire 4/6]

Pm me your email and I'll send some pictures of my stock 78 cyclone suspension.

PM sent. Thanks a bunch!

[harleysportster]

Pm me your email and I'll send some pictures of my stock 78 cyclone suspension.

PM sent. Thanks a bunch!

As it turns out, it is easier sending thru this format. It looks like your suspension is normal as compared to mine.

[harleysportster]

Here is some eye candy

[Liquifire 4/6]

Here is some eye candy

Yes, the first picture you posted looks exactly the same as my Cyclone so I guess mine is normal. But what's up with this second picture? Is that a newer 80-84 Liquifire track and suspension in a 78 Liquifire? I like the look of that!

[harleysportster]

That is my version of a 78 cross country clone using a 1980 skid and an Arctic Cat all rubber track.