Xr200 Overall Fork Length

[SHOVLE65]

I need to know the overall fork length for 84-91 XR200R forks? I'm looking to replace my 2002 forks for more travel but all the ones that i've found for those years (that is the years that they claim thay are) measure the same as mine (approx 36"). Seems like if they have more travel the overall length should be longer. I've seached through the piles of fork threads here but found no length number. A length number or some other way to identify the longer travel forks would be great. Thank you in advance.

[Quick Draw]

The difference is only about 2.5". I used to have the older forks on my '02, but I have since sold them for my CR front end. I believe that when I had the long travel forks, the hole for the axle was a little lower on the fork tubes than '92-'02, so that gave it a little more height. Also, the dampening rod, and other innards were designed differently, so more travel was possible. I think that my long travel forks were only about 1-2" longer than stock. It certainly sat up higher...

Sometimes with used parts, you just have to take a gamble, and go by what they say it is. Hopefully, you would only be gambling $20 or so....if it's much more than that, then you have to ask yourself whether the gamble is worth it. To date, I have purchased at least 15 used parts, ranging from small letter sized packages, to monster 60 pound boxes off of Ebay, with no disappointments so far....

[mels95yj]

If noboby else chimes in before this evening, I'll measure for you. I'm going through this as we speak. As QuickDraw said, the insides are different. The lower fork is the same length, but I believe the upper is longer on the '84-'91's. Also, the damping rod inside is about 1 1/2" longer in the older models. I'll check back this afternoon.

Mel

[mels95yj]

Ok, since nobody else chimed in, here goes. I just measured my '84 forks, with Progressive springs, and they were 37 3/16ths inches. My old stock '95 forks were 36". I don't know if that helps you, and I don't know if the Progressive springs makes a difference. HTH

Mel

[XR-rated]

I get 36 & 1/8" on my son's 99' with 88' forks on it. As mentioned earlier the only diff is the damper rods and springs. Some of the longer travel had spacers.

You'll need a rear shock to BTW.

[Quick Draw]

XR-rated, that measurement must be on the ground with the bikes weight on them.... I think Mel's forks are unloaded....just for the record.

[XR-rated]

For the record yes. That's measured with a tape measure just walking out in the garge with the bike on the ground and on the kick stand. It does have stiffer springs than the stock 88's.

[XR-rated]

By God I get 37 & 5/8" on the jack.

[mels95yj]

Ok, I just had a little panic session there. I just stopped at XR-rated's first post on his being an inch shorter than mine. I was trying to figure out what I had done wrong to mine. Whew! Glad to see it's because mine's unloaded! Quickdraw was correct. Mine was removed from the bike when I measured.

Also, for the record, I measured mine to the top of the fork cap and not to the top of the air valve.

Mel

[SHOVLE65]

Thanks for the info guys. So it looks like if thay measure at least 37" from the end of the fork leg to the fork cap unloaded thay are the longer travel ones. Unfortunately it looks like the other two sets of forks i found were not what thay said thay were. I need at rear shock too. (judging buy the oil leaking out of mine) Just seems more logical to upgrade to the earlier suspention front and rear too. Again thanks for the info.