People really overcomplicate this. You can have your A9LH SysNAND on 11.0. As long as you have 9.2 EmuNAND, you can still boot GW. This is what I do.
But regardless, the op wants to ditch GW.
Then again, I'm no gateway user. I don't overcomplicate anything, I just want to have a 9.2 sysnand.
There are many reasons for that. I have my own ones.
- A pretty good one is the reselling value of a vanilla 9.2 N3ds versus a 11.0 N3ds seeing the changelog. I won't sell my systems, still.
- Another one is having a 9.2 FIRM stored in sysnand's CTRNAND. Could come in handy, for several reasons.
- A decent one is the migration value. If you had a 9.2 sysnand and worked with menuhax and emunand, it's by far easier setup any emunand capable cfw to boot your "old" emunand with your game tickets and complying savedata/extdata right after A9LH install is complete.
- A point rised in other threads suggest the replaceability of an SD. Perhaps it's slower, but if it corrupts or breaks your sysnand is still fine. Arguably less writes/reads to real nand extend his life span.
I'm sure you also have a list of reasons why ditching emunand is a good move. It's fine. Your system, your rules.
There's not a real difference in setup schemas for grown ups.
Then again, you are right, we are kinda derailing the thread. Thanks.