The Suspension Lift Nobody Mentioned

The one condition that names a part

Camso publishes a short list of remark letters against individual applications and defines them in a legend at the head of every page of its guide. Most of them describe something that happens to the machine: parts come off, something interferes, speed drops. One of them describes something that has to be bought.

B* Suspension lift kit requiredCamso ATV/UTV Track System Application Guide, August 2026 revision, read 2026-09-26

Four words, and the word carrying the money is required. Not recommended, not advisable on some vehicles — required, against a specific published application. That is the manufacturer stating that the application as published does not complete without a part it does not sell, does not name, and does not specify.

For a buyer that is a purchasing problem rather than a mechanical one. A track system is ordered against an application. The application is flagged. The flag names a second part. Nothing published says which part, so nothing about the order tells you the order is incomplete — the cost is fully disclosed by the manufacturer and still invisible at the point of sale.

The machines carrying it

Every machine below is one the catalogue records as carrying this condition, shown against every condition published for any machine in the set. Find your row and read it all the way across rather than stopping at the lift-kit column: 4 of these machines carry a further condition as well, and that is the one that changes what the install does to the machine.

■ the manufacturer publishes this condition against this application. · it publishes no such condition against it, which is not the same as publishing that the condition does not apply. Every condition the catalogue carries for any machine in this table has a column here. None is held back to keep the table narrow.

Every row in that grid is a Camso row. The condition appears under X4S and T4S, and on every machine in the set each system publishing it publishes the same requirement. Counted as application records rather than as machines it occurs 14 times, one of 6 distinct condition strings anywhere in the catalogue.

The same set read down, with the rear-suspension value the catalogue records against each machine. A lift kit is vehicle-side hardware, and rear suspension is the vehicle-side value the catalogue publishes — it is also what it splits these rows on:

Do not build a rule out of the suspension column: the requirement is recorded against machines of Independent rear and Rigid rear axle alike. It is not a property of one rear-suspension layout, so you cannot tell from your own machine’s layout whether the flag applies. It is published per application and has to be read per application.

What else is on the same rows

4 of the 7 machines above carry at least one further published condition, and 3 carry this one alone. The conditions sharing those rows are Permanent interference and Temporary body parts removal.

2 of them carry a remark whose first word is permanent, alongside the lift-kit requirement. On those machines the manufacturer is publishing two separate things about one install: that a part has to be bought which is not in the track kit, and that something about the result is described with a word it declines to use elsewhere in the same legend.

Camso does not publish what that permanence attaches to — what is known about it is on the permanent-interference entry. If your machine is one of these, it is the flag to raise with the shop first: a lift kit is a purchase, and permanence is not.

What Camso does not publish about the part

The requirement is published. Everything that would let you act on it is not. Looked for in the guide revision cited above and on the manufacturer’s product and support pages on 2026-09-26:

• Which lift kit. No brand, no part number, no supplier and no approved-kit list appears against any flagged application.
• How much lift. No dimension is published — not a height, not a range, not a minimum.
• What the lift is for. The guide does not state what the extra height clears, so the reason for the requirement is not recoverable from anything published.
• Whether Camso supplies one. Nothing read on that date indicates the manufacturer sells, specifies or approves a lift kit for any of these machines.
• What the vehicle manufacturer says. None of the vehicle makers above published a position on suspension lift kits with track systems that could be found on that date.

The practical consequence: the lift kit is a part you will be sourcing on somebody’s recommendation rather than to a published specification. Get that recommendation in writing, with the make, model year and rear-suspension type on it, so the machine and the kit can be matched up again later by somebody who was not in the conversation.

Where the second purchase is not

The gap sits in the seam between two catalogues. A system order resolves to the track kit, the mount kit for the machine, and the anti-rotation hardware — on one of the two manufacturers those are separate line items from the kit itself. A suspension lift kit is none of those. It is vehicle-side hardware, and whether the shop taking the order stocks one varies shop to shop.

So your protection here is a question asked before the order rather than after it. The flag is published per application, so the first thing to establish is whether your machine sits on a flagged row at all — on these makes the catalogue splits machine names across rows by model year and by rear suspension, and the requirement may be on only one of them.

The lift is a change to the vehicle, not to the system

Worth reading before the work is booked, because the two warranties cover different objects. Camso publishes its limited warranty as applying exclusively to parts and components of the track system. A suspension lift kit is not a part or component of the track system; it is a modification to the machine the system bolts to, and the machine’s own warranty is a separate document held by a separate manufacturer.

Neither published set of terms addresses that combination. The terms themselves are quoted and dated on the warranty entry; the question to put to both dealers before the lift goes on is what it does to each cover.

What to ask before the order goes in

Not one of these is answerable by anything Camso publishes, and all but the last are answerable by the shop taking the order. Ask before the kit is on the truck.

• Which published application row is mine, by model year and rear-suspension type, and does that row carry this remark?
• Which specific lift kit does this dealer fit to this machine, and is it on the order or bought elsewhere?
• Does the lift go on before the track system, and does fitting it change the installation time quoted for the system itself?
• Is the lift labour included in the installation quote for the track system, or separate?
• Does the machine stay lifted year-round, or does the kit come off with the tracks — and if it stays, what does that change about the machine on tires?
• Does the same row carry any other remark, and what does the shop understand that one to mean on this machine? Ask for all of them, not the one you came in about.
• What does the vehicle’s own dealer network say about a lift kit on this model, which is a different conversation from the one about the track system?

Why the other manufacturer’s rows are blank

Several of the machines above are also published by the other manufacturer in this catalogue, and 7 of them appear under it with no condition against those rows at all. That is not a comparison between systems. Of every Commander WS4 row in the snapshot, 0 carry a published condition: the remarks field is empty on all of them.

Kimpex publishes no per-application condition data at all: every Commander WS4 record in this catalogue has an empty remarks field. The absence of a WS4 entry below means nobody has published a condition for it — not that none exists. Camso is the only manufacturer here that publishes these flags, so this page is necessarily a Camso view of the catalogue.

Which inverts the obvious reading. On these machines the manufacturer that tells you a lift kit is required looks like the more demanding option, and the one that says nothing looks like the easier one. What is actually being compared is a manufacturer that publishes conditions against a manufacturer that publishes none. An absent row is an absence of data. It is not a clearance — so if you are choosing the quiet route, the lift kit is still a question for the shop.

Resolving which row is yours

Two things identify it: the model year and the rear-suspension type. A machine name alone does not, on any of these makes. Neither does this page — a snapshot cannot say what the catalogue holds today, so take those two figures to the live fitment tool or to the shop and have them read the remark column back to you.